6 ms·

A completely biased report. Yes, gerrymandering is insane in NC, but it's actually pretty well distributed between both parties. Raleigh is gerrymandered to the

A completely biased report. Yes, gerrymandering is insane in NC, but it's actually pretty well distributed between both parties. Raleigh is gerrymandered to the Republicans and Charlotte and Fayetteville are for rigged for the Democrats. The rest of the state is pretty much full-on red, so the majority Republican legislature truly reflects the state as a democratic-republic. NC has Voter ID laws, which were a huge part of the x/100 score given. Literally every other developed country (and most undeveloped countries) in the world require ID to vote, but somehow it's "undemocratic", among other outrageous things, if you try to do it in the U.S.

IanDrake 9y ago
Relevant: https://youtu.be/odB1wWPqSlE https://youtu.be/odB1wWPqSlE
- IanDrake 9y ago
  I know, I know, down vote me because it’s not PC to point out that leftist thinking is racist.
  - dang 9y ago
    Complaints about voting break the HN guidelines, and so does ideological flamebait and race-baiting. Please don't do any of these things here, regardless of ideology. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
andrewaylett 9y ago
The UK (which is -- at least for the moment -- usually considered "developed") doesn't require ID to vote.
pjc50 9y ago
> Literally every other developed country (and most undeveloped countries) in the world require ID to vote Well, the UK doesn't. And most other developed countries have proper national mandatory ID systems where everyone has an ID. People would complain a lot less about the ID requirement if the ID was equally easy to get for all voters, which it isn't.
- SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
  > People would complain a lot less about the ID requirement if the ID was equally easy to get for all voters, which it isn't. This is the nub of it. The way to disenfranchise people "legitimately" is to 1) insist on the voters having an Id and 2) make it hard for some people to get the necessary Id. Longer discussion here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFOwlMCdto https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFOwlMCdto "these restrictions tend to disproportionately impact African-American and Latino voters"
- fortythirteen 9y ago
  > if the ID was equally easy to get for all voters Who in this country is unable to get an ID? More specifically, who in NC is unable to get an ID?
  - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
    Those who can’t make it to the middle of nowhere DMV. Texas was particularly egregarious about this, at the same time they made voter ID required, they closed down DMV offices in poorer democratic areas. Heck, the reason IDs are so contentious in the first place is that southern states have abused them in the past to suppress minority voting rights.
    - fortythirteen 9y ago
      While I don't disagree that that's part of the overall strategy, I have a hard time believing that someone can't find the time once to get an ID every four years. Poor people living literally in the middle of nowhere in a state like Texas work it out, so why can't people in the city? It's rather convenient that the Democrats are always against any measure that would make elections less easy to rig, and provide no active solutions to improve the situation.
      - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
        I didn’t have a valid state ID for ten years. I had a passport, but why do I need a state ID if I’m not driving? There are many reasons why people can’t or won’t get state IDs, even if you can’t fathom it. Until we have mandatory federal IDs (which, incidentally, Republicans are usually against because...facism or something), making them required for a civic duty is just dumb and unfair.
mcintyre1994 9y ago
The UK doesn't require ID to vote.
Redoubts 9y ago
> the majority Republican legislature truly reflects the state as a democratic-republic. The governor race in 2016 went 49%-48.8%, yet 2/10 representative sent to Washington are Democrats. Why do you think this is representative?
travmatt 9y ago
It’s odd and telling to me that you criticize the repeal of voter ID laws without actually mentioning why they were declared unconstitutional. They were repealed after North Carolina Republicans were shown in court to have investigated the ways in which minorities voted, the types of ID’s they carried, and then issued laws with ‘surgical precision’ to affect said voters, then went on to brag about their effects on the ‘Obama coalition’. If you are having a hard time understanding why they were declared unconstitutional I’d encourage you to read the court decision that declared them so, it does a good job of laying out the steps North Carolina Republicans used to specifically target and disenfranchise minority voters.
- plandis 9y ago
  From the court decision [1]: > But, on the day after the Supreme Court issued Shelby County v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 2612 (2013), eliminating preclearance obligations, a leader of the party that newly dominated the legislature (and the party that rarely enjoyed African American support) announced an intention to enact what he characterized as an “omnibus” election law. Before enacting that law, the legislature requested data on the use, by race, of a number of voting practices. Upon receipt of the race data, the General Assembly enacted legislation that restricted voting and registration in five different ways, all of which disproportionately affected African Americans. In response to claims that intentional racial discrimination animated its action, the State offered only meager justifications. Although the new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist. That does seem pretty damning when you read their justification [1] http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-4th.pdf http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-4th.pdf
- fortythirteen 9y ago
  Voter ID laws themselves were not declared unconstitutional, the extra actions by the Republicans were. I see no effort from Democrats to offer any option on how to secure our elections, which is especially damning considering they've spent the whole last year falsely claiming that they were "hacked". Active election fraud is almost exclusively in the favor of the Democratic party. I can't remember the last time someone on the right was arrested for fraudulently filling out registrations forms, or when >100% of the registered voters in a district voted for the Republican candidate, as happened as recently as the 2016 presidential election in Detroit in the favor of Clinton. The problem isn't voter ID. It's two sides using it as a way to unfairly benefit their interests. One side pre-emptively and the other actively during the vote. Both are wrong, but Voter ID itself isn't.
shove 9y ago
That isn't quite true -- Raleigh (Wake county) is pretty reliably blue as are large parts of northeastern NC (which is about as rural as it gets). Also, a gentle reminder that square miles don't get to vote -- people do. Voter ID laws are consistently shown to disadvantage poor minority voters -- especially when coupled with the strategic closure of DMV offices and an increase in fees -- as surprise we've seen here in NC.
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  Not that I disagree, but I think states that require IDs for voting are required to give non-driving IDs away for free. The trouble is getting to the office in the first place.
  - steveax 9y ago
    And being able to produce the qualifying documents for the ID. There’s a non-trivial number of people (usually older, lower income) that do not possess, nor have ever needed to possess before, a birth certificate.
    - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
      Hell, I was one of those people before I needed to get a passport (I guess I had it when I got my first DL, but it must have been with my dad or something). Thank god Oregon will mail one to you easily, if I was Californian the process would have been in for much more hurt (as I found out with my son!).
matt_s 9y ago
I live in NC and have voted twice (last 2 years) and have not been asked for any ID, nor did I see anyone else get asked.
- SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
  Selective application of the rules is also a tool. In the area where you vote, did you notice a substantial percentage of the voters being poor or ethnic minority? If not, no need to check the ids.
FireBeyond 9y ago
> The rest of the state is pretty much full-on red > so the majority Republican legislature I get that this is the system, but it's an inherent problem of the system. If (arbitrary numbers) 5M people live in three cities and they voted Democrat (leaving aside the Raleigh issue for now), and 1M people live in the rest of the state, there is no credulous interpretation of how you can come to a conclusion that "the majority of the state is Republican" other than to acknowledge that your system is not about 1 person, 1 vote, but 1 unit of land, 1 vote, and it unfairly awards people who own large tracts of land, or live in undeveloped areas. Yes, yes, I get that this was to allow country folk to feel represented. But be clear, in no way is the state truly "majority Republican" other than in terms of square miles, regardless of who does or doesn't (because huge tracts of federal land, national parks and the like, get lumped into these rural districts) live there.

IanDrake 9y ago

Relevant: https://youtu.be/odB1wWPqSlE https://youtu.be/odB1wWPqSlE

IanDrake 9y ago
I know, I know, down vote me because it’s not PC to point out that leftist thinking is racist.
- dang 9y ago
  Complaints about voting break the HN guidelines, and so does ideological flamebait and race-baiting. Please don't do any of these things here, regardless of ideology. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

andrewaylett 9y ago

The UK (which is -- at least for the moment -- usually considered "developed") doesn't require ID to vote.

pjc50 9y ago

> Literally every other developed country (and most undeveloped countries) in the world require ID to vote Well, the UK doesn't. And most other developed countries have proper national mandatory ID systems where everyone has an ID. People would complain a lot less about the ID requirement if the ID was equally easy to get for all voters, which it isn't.

SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
> People would complain a lot less about the ID requirement if the ID was equally easy to get for all voters, which it isn't. This is the nub of it. The way to disenfranchise people "legitimately" is to 1) insist on the voters having an Id and 2) make it hard for some people to get the necessary Id. Longer discussion here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFOwlMCdto https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFOwlMCdto "these restrictions tend to disproportionately impact African-American and Latino voters"
fortythirteen 9y ago
> if the ID was equally easy to get for all voters Who in this country is unable to get an ID? More specifically, who in NC is unable to get an ID?
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  Those who can’t make it to the middle of nowhere DMV. Texas was particularly egregarious about this, at the same time they made voter ID required, they closed down DMV offices in poorer democratic areas. Heck, the reason IDs are so contentious in the first place is that southern states have abused them in the past to suppress minority voting rights.
  - fortythirteen 9y ago
    While I don't disagree that that's part of the overall strategy, I have a hard time believing that someone can't find the time once to get an ID every four years. Poor people living literally in the middle of nowhere in a state like Texas work it out, so why can't people in the city? It's rather convenient that the Democrats are always against any measure that would make elections less easy to rig, and provide no active solutions to improve the situation.
    - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
      I didn’t have a valid state ID for ten years. I had a passport, but why do I need a state ID if I’m not driving? There are many reasons why people can’t or won’t get state IDs, even if you can’t fathom it. Until we have mandatory federal IDs (which, incidentally, Republicans are usually against because...facism or something), making them required for a civic duty is just dumb and unfair.

mcintyre1994 9y ago

The UK doesn't require ID to vote.

Redoubts 9y ago

> the majority Republican legislature truly reflects the state as a democratic-republic. The governor race in 2016 went 49%-48.8%, yet 2/10 representative sent to Washington are Democrats. Why do you think this is representative?

travmatt 9y ago

It’s odd and telling to me that you criticize the repeal of voter ID laws without actually mentioning why they were declared unconstitutional. They were repealed after North Carolina Republicans were shown in court to have investigated the ways in which minorities voted, the types of ID’s they carried, and then issued laws with ‘surgical precision’ to affect said voters, then went on to brag about their effects on the ‘Obama coalition’. If you are having a hard time understanding why they were declared unconstitutional I’d encourage you to read the court decision that declared them so, it does a good job of laying out the steps North Carolina Republicans used to specifically target and disenfranchise minority voters.

plandis 9y ago
From the court decision [1]: > But, on the day after the Supreme Court issued Shelby County v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 2612 (2013), eliminating preclearance obligations, a leader of the party that newly dominated the legislature (and the party that rarely enjoyed African American support) announced an intention to enact what he characterized as an “omnibus” election law. Before enacting that law, the legislature requested data on the use, by race, of a number of voting practices. Upon receipt of the race data, the General Assembly enacted legislation that restricted voting and registration in five different ways, all of which disproportionately affected African Americans. In response to claims that intentional racial discrimination animated its action, the State offered only meager justifications. Although the new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist. That does seem pretty damning when you read their justification [1] http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-4th.pdf http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-4th.pdf
fortythirteen 9y ago
Voter ID laws themselves were not declared unconstitutional, the extra actions by the Republicans were. I see no effort from Democrats to offer any option on how to secure our elections, which is especially damning considering they've spent the whole last year falsely claiming that they were "hacked". Active election fraud is almost exclusively in the favor of the Democratic party. I can't remember the last time someone on the right was arrested for fraudulently filling out registrations forms, or when >100% of the registered voters in a district voted for the Republican candidate, as happened as recently as the 2016 presidential election in Detroit in the favor of Clinton. The problem isn't voter ID. It's two sides using it as a way to unfairly benefit their interests. One side pre-emptively and the other actively during the vote. Both are wrong, but Voter ID itself isn't.

shove 9y ago

That isn't quite true -- Raleigh (Wake county) is pretty reliably blue as are large parts of northeastern NC (which is about as rural as it gets). Also, a gentle reminder that square miles don't get to vote -- people do. Voter ID laws are consistently shown to disadvantage poor minority voters -- especially when coupled with the strategic closure of DMV offices and an increase in fees -- as surprise we've seen here in NC.

seanmcdirmid 9y ago
Not that I disagree, but I think states that require IDs for voting are required to give non-driving IDs away for free. The trouble is getting to the office in the first place.
- steveax 9y ago
  And being able to produce the qualifying documents for the ID. There’s a non-trivial number of people (usually older, lower income) that do not possess, nor have ever needed to possess before, a birth certificate.
  - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
    Hell, I was one of those people before I needed to get a passport (I guess I had it when I got my first DL, but it must have been with my dad or something). Thank god Oregon will mail one to you easily, if I was Californian the process would have been in for much more hurt (as I found out with my son!).

matt_s 9y ago

I live in NC and have voted twice (last 2 years) and have not been asked for any ID, nor did I see anyone else get asked.

SideburnsOfDoom 9y ago
Selective application of the rules is also a tool. In the area where you vote, did you notice a substantial percentage of the voters being poor or ethnic minority? If not, no need to check the ids.

FireBeyond 9y ago

> The rest of the state is pretty much full-on red > so the majority Republican legislature I get that this is the system, but it's an inherent problem of the system. If (arbitrary numbers) 5M people live in three cities and they voted Democrat (leaving aside the Raleigh issue for now), and 1M people live in the rest of the state, there is no credulous interpretation of how you can come to a conclusion that "the majority of the state is Republican" other than to acknowledge that your system is not about 1 person, 1 vote, but 1 unit of land, 1 vote, and it unfairly awards people who own large tracts of land, or live in undeveloped areas. Yes, yes, I get that this was to allow country folk to feel represented. But be clear, in no way is the state truly "majority Republican" other than in terms of square miles, regardless of who does or doesn't (because huge tracts of federal land, national parks and the like, get lumped into these rural districts) live there.