Take Serious Note Of This

Of course the GOP says it is becausese the Democrats have a strong majority in New Mexico and it hasn't been seen as a problem for them.

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights began an investigation in January 2001 following the public outcry after the election. Although Democrats appointed 6 of the 8 commissioners and the hearings were often hostile toward Republicans, the Commission could not find evidence that a single person was intimidated, harassed, or prevented from voting by Florida law enforcement.

The Commission could not find evidence of systematic disenfranchisement of African-American voters, and concluded that state officials were not at fault for widespread voter disenfranchisement.

In point of fact, tens of thousands Florida voters were wrongly disenfranchised as a result of an inaccurate list of supposed felons who were wrongly deemed ineligible to vote.

Did you read the report you posted PDiddie? I just did. And McG is right if you take this one report as sole evidence here.

Foxfyre wrote:

Did you read the report you posted PDiddie? I just did. And McG is right if you take this one report as sole evidence here.

What is wrong with your comprehension skills?

What about voter disenfranchisement is a puzzle to you two?

There is no mystery here.

Try again. It's OK with me if you don't agree with the Commission's findings, but at this point I have to believe there's got be something deeper going on here than just mere ignorance...

why not quote the parts of the report that refute the argument that has been made?

McGentrix wrote:

why not quote the parts of the report that refute the argument that has been made?

No, sonny; you need to go read it and then post that with which you disagree (if indeed you still do after reading it).

That's how it works here, in this moderately intelligent discussion forum (although I must say that to continue discussing with you what the report concludes is lowering the bar on 'intelligent discussion').

You quoted an AEI opinion piece of the report...

I cited the report.

Run along now and do some reading.

The voter disenfranchisement is because black voters are considered to have been at a disadvantage due to the machines they had to use to vote rather than due to any attempt by anybody to prevent them from voting Pdiddie. Which is the point McG made.

On the other hand, no such assertion was made in primarily white voter areas using the same type equipment.

Therefore, I think the assumption that black voters are disenfranchised by using punch card machines when (by presumption) white voters are not disenrfranchised by punch card machines is extremely racist, patronizing, and insulting to black voters.

The Commission heard from several experts regarding potential violations of the VRA during the Florida presidential election, including Professors Allan Lichtman and Darryl Paulson.

Professor Lichtman, applying the results test, said, "The key is whether a system, regardless of why it was adopted or why it was held in place, has the effect of diminishing minority voting opportunities."[36] Professor Lichtman explained:

Quote:

We do not have to demonstrate an intent to discriminate. We do not have to demonstrate that there was some kind of conspiracy against minorities or that anyone involved in the administration of elections today or yesterday had any intent whatever to discriminate against minorities, because indeed under the Voting Rights Act, practices can be illegal so long as they have the effect of diminishing minority opportunities to participate fully in the political process and elect candidates of their choice.

Professor Lichtman testified that a violation occurs if the following two criteria are satisfied:

--if there are "differences in voting procedures and voting technologies between white areas and minority areas"; and

--if voting procedures and voting technologies used in minority areas "give minorities less of an opportunity to have their votes counted."

So, now you are displaying your ignorance on how debate works?

Please. If you disagree with what the article I posted says, explain why.

Your posting the report that the AEI article references does nothing but assert the validity of the AEI article.

I wonder if you actually read the report.

It only works PDiddie if there were no 'older machines' in any predominantly white counties or if there were no predominantly white precincts (using the older machines) in Dade County or the other disputed counties. The report would be much more credible if it had simply reported a higher voter error in the counties using the punch card machines and therefore high priority should be given to replacing these machines. The attempt to make this somehow an effort to keep black people from voting is, iny opinion, ludicrous and politically motivated.