Poll: 62% of respondents don’t think voter ID laws discriminate
The Rasmussen poll is here:
Most voters say it’s more important to prevent cheating in elections than to make it easier to vote and, by more than a two-to-one margin, they reject claims that voter ID laws are discriminatory.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that just 29% of Likely U.S. Voters say laws requiring photo identification at the polls discriminate against some voters. Sixty-two percent (62%) say voter ID laws don’t discriminate.
Problem is, the Democratic Party does not care. They have their narrative and they’re sticking to it. If they can pass HR1 (which remains to be seen) they will pass it, reducing election security and opening up greater opportunity for fraud.
If they accomplish that, and take far more control of the voting process for the entire United States, what the mere voters think will become even less important.
If they pass HR1, we would soon lose the Republic and become a Nationalistic country. Nationalism is what the Democrats want, but somehow the Republicans seem willing to place the blame on themselves or faction supposedly “far right” (more right than Republicans). Most people I see labeled “far right” are more classically liberal than anybody to their left.
Monday’s Tucker Carlson’s opening monologue made the same point. The material they use is illegal immigration to change the demographics of a state. Listen at the 12 minute mark about the impact of black influence in regards to the rest of the state of California.
If you haven’t listened to it, it is a good way of spending 20 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0e4QjoJ4wc&ab_channel=FoxNews
Also The People’s Pundit in their poll gave the same results as Rasmussen. They did a deep dive last week about this.
Blacks OVERWHELMINGLY supported voter ID laws because they have an intimate history of voter suppression with illegal ballots. That is the big take away
There are 30 M+ illegals in this country. Give them status and voting rights will soon follow. Then the black percent of population will fall below 10%. They will start becoming irrelevant. Explain that to a person and you will see a shift in attitude about illegal immigration in a hurry.
Change is a process and not a moment.
Polls could say 80, 90% and Dems would be more determined than ever to pass HR1.
Now is the time the Dems have the opportunity finish it for good … forever! They won’t need the black vote anymore.
I have to say, since when has public opinion mattered to our political class?
Art+Deco,
You may be correct that in recent years the opinion of “the people” isn’t mentioned much in the media. But “since when?” I recall that prior to and maybe during Obama’s first term an incessant appearance of Dem operatives telling the camera what the American people think or want. And crowing when the opinion polls reached 51% for the policy they wanted.
> Nationalism is what the Democrats want
I am not sure you can have Nationalism when you hate your own country.
A Socialist/Communist dictatorship seems to be what they want.
It seems to me that what both Democrats and Republicans want is power, for its own sake (not necessarily to accomplish anything).
Authoritarianism is becoming more palatable, to the base of both parties (the “leaders” are just following their respective bases at this point).
I recall that prior to and maybe during Obama’s first term an incessant appearance of Dem operatives telling the camera what the American people think or want.
There are actual concerns and there are talking points.
They don’t hate the country. Parasites don’t hate the host, they just need the carcass the way they want it and not how the host wanted it.
The Left does not want nationalism. They want globalism.
Evidenced by the fact that in no country dominated by the Western Left do they advance a nationalistic agenda.
A globalism run by a non-elected, bureaucratic elite answerable only to the vastly wealthy.
I keep returning to this point: nearly everything which the average citizen conducts with authority or government requires a valid ID.
Why the exception is made for voting appears to me to be obvious: the Left seeks to manipulate the process to their advantage.
I see that there is a great rush to implement as much as possible before the 2022 election as they know there will be tremendous blowback.
As Althouse has closed her Comments section (as is her prerogative) I will be spending a lot more time here.
Roger – I think some of the debate has to do with what is a valid ID. There need to be enough valid choices to cover every eligible voter without incurring undue hardship in getting an ID to vote.
For example, I’m good with showing my DL when I vote. But not everyone has a DL. (I need to look up what my state requires). Some states allow a recent electric bill, student ID, etc.
Also would like to make sure waits/lines are equitable. I had to wait fifteen minutes to early vote. Some precincts in my city had waits of ten hours.
“Sixty-two percent (62%) say voter ID laws don’t discriminate.”
Of course people have an opinion. But it’s not a priority that would cause them to change who they vote for.
I read that someone set up a site for former Althousians to congregate. Did it fall apart? If people don’t know about it, I could go look up the conversation and find a link.
Lemme know
AA commenters, email misplacedpants at protonmail dot com
“Problem is, the Democratic Party does not care.” – Neo
I have ceased to put the “-ic” at the end of the name, as their current policies on voting make it clear they are no longer democratic in anything BUT name.
They will continue to call themselves democrats, but calling a tail a leg doesn’t give a dog five legs (Lincoln).
Now I have a vision of Captain Picard shouting, “There are four legs!”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moX3z2RJAV8
Meaning no disrespect to what is probably one of, if not the, best STNG episodes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moX3z2RJAV8
I don’t see how HR1’s voting changes survives a challenge at the SCOTUS level. Granted, they’ve been selective in how they decide to meddle in select states’ voting laws, but I would thing that even the 3 milquetoasties on the bench would rule the law an unconstitutional overreach of the congress.
But this is Clownworld, so what do I know?
Also important, farther down in the same poll: 51% of voters overall now say that cheating affected the election’s outcome. 74% of Reps, 51% of unaffiliated, and even 30% of Dems.
Despite months of aggressive Media/Establishment gaslighting on the subject, this is actually up slightly from the 47% overall answer Rasmussen got to a similar question two weeks after the election. https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/11/21/rasmussen-poll-20-30-of-democrats-believe-the-election-was-stolen-from-trump-998438/
I take from this two thoughts: The hopeful one that a large part of the public now seems immune to even the most frenzied of Establishment don’t-believe-your-lying-eyes campaigns.
And the fearsome one that the Dem’s unsubtle cheating last November has stored up a huge amount of trouble waiting for the right seed crystal to precipitate. Will current Dem attempts to ignore the 62% of the voting public that admits to believing in voter ID provide that seed? Maybe not, but they sure don’t dilute the problem.
The only thing that would convince the Democrats that we need stronger election security is if the GOP were better then them at stuffing the ballot boxes.
If HR1 passes, the only rational response for the GOP is to mount a massive campaign to use every trick in the book to cheat in every district and county they control. Only after being beaten at their own game, will they agree to make the system fair. Would it turn the 2022 elections into a farce? Absolutely! But, that farce needs to be publicly obvious.
gmmay70:
If they pack the Court, anything goes. But even without that, it’s not at all certain that HR1 is unconstitutional. I’ve written about that at length in this post.
Roy Nathanson:
Aside from the obvious ethical issues, there is one big practical issue with your suggestion: it’s far easier to cheat effectively and on a large scale when you control the big cities. Republicans don’t control the cities. Democrats control the big cities in swing states. That’s a very important point.
The party that controls the cities only needs to cheat in a few places, and the cheating is much harder to detect. The party that doesn’t control the big cities would have to cheat across the board, and a large number of fraudulent votes in any one place is easier to detect and more likely to raise red flags when the place is small. In a big city, much easier to slip in a lot of fraudulent votes.
Voter ID laws and requirements do discriminate – against people that are not legally allowed to vote. That’s a good thing. Voting should require some effort and some sacrifice, the least of which is to know who and what you are voting for or against.
The Democrat party consistently chooses paths that lead to bad things because when bad things happen, they find opportunity and benefit to their ability to wield power…
Russia takes Ukraine, boom – power
China takes Taiwan, boom – more power
Pandemic, boom – more power
Iran bombs Israel, boom – more power
Financial collapse, boom – more power
Real insurrection, boom – more power
Everything they do is calculated to power like the soviets
What happens to people is incidental as they are materialists, like the soviets
There is a site for Althouse Refugees, 70 at last count. Ask misplacedpants@protonmail.com for an invitation.
thx, tcrosse
Bill, I think you are giving the Left far too much credit. 100,000 absentee ballots, pulling stuffed suitcases from hidden areas under table, videotaped midnight ballot dumps in Michigan, pristine/unfolded/photocopied ballots being counted, covered windows, locked-out Republican observers; do not point to a question regarding what is valid ID.
And if you are 10 hours in line to vote, then the solution is to open more secure voting sites, not backdate votes and facilitate obvious voter fraud.
What I find strange? If HR 1 is going to effectively negate state voting laws, then why is there so much angst among the left and woke corporations in reference to the new laws in Georgia? Could it be that the powers that be believe that HR 1 could be ruled unconstitutional?
Neo,
1. Ethical considerations:
I remember when the U.S. enforced the amateur status rules in the Olympics. In many sports, the Americans simply couldn’t compete with the (essentially) professional athletes and teams that were being fielded by the Communist countries. Eventually, the U.S. Olympic Comittee decided that enough was enough and that the U.S. would compete by the same rules as everyone else. Remember the Dream Team?
At some point when you are getting clobbered by an enemy that isn’t recognizing the same codes of ethical conduct as you are, continuing to take a beating for the sake of honor is silly.
If the Democrats get thrashed in this manner in 2022, then perhaps they will be amenable to strict voter ID laws and other means to ensure the system is not cheated.
2. Republican cheating would be more apparent:
In this case, the more apparent, the better to make the point. The goal of this strategy would not be to establish a new status quo. The goal would be to return to strict controls on voting to ensure fairness.
Neo, I too am uncomfortable with this. But, I lived through the downfall of democracy in Venezuela. I know that at some point there is no democratic and peaceful return. If you are serious about winning, you have to be prepared to do what is necessary, because the alternative is worse.
Neo, thanks for the link and explanation. Of course, court packing will basically undermine, well…everything. Hopefully, though not likely, Biden’s “plan” is just to banish the court packing plan to committee purgatory.
As for the constitutionality of HR1, I guess my knowledge was based on SCOTUS precedent more than constitutional language, which I’m a bit rusty on when it comes to voting provisions. I thought the language was a little more concrete.
Thank you, Anne Parsons and tcrosse for the Althouse Refugee Center contact info.
Roy Nathanson wrote:
“Neo, I too am uncomfortable with this. But, I lived through the downfall of democracy in Venezuela. I know that at some point there is no democratic and peaceful return.”
I am beginning to think that there is eventually a peaceful return. What is happening in Cuba, with Raoul Castro stepping down, gives me that hope. Overly optimistic, perhaps, but Cubans still have a memory of life before the Castros.
F,
Raul Castro stepping down meant nothing more than Hugo Chavez’s death did. These are not the same sort of one-man dictatorships as that of Saddam Hussein or Idi Amin. This is a group of criminals who cooperate with each other to assure that they continue to benefit from the advantages of operating their criminal enterprises from their own nation-state.