*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Friday, October 25th, 2013 4:43pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter VoodooV.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by eric3579.

Well, this guy isn't a spokesperson for the GOP, so the title is a bit misleading.

I don't think the law is necessarily racist (individual politicians are a different story), but reducing voter turnout for Democratic voters is transparently one of its main strategic goals. Laws like this will have far more impact on election results than voter fraud ever could have.

Blocked.

The law affects all citizens equally.

This republican hopes that lazy people will be lazy and not bother to get a free ID, And he implies that who he thinks are the lazies in his state just happen to be democrats.

Time will tell if he is correct.

Just like the 3/5ths compromise and voter literacy tests affected everyone equally eh?

Your admission that this law has nothing to do with combating the already insignificant and inconsequential voter fraud...


...is accepted.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Daily Show, Jon Stewart, racism, voter suppression' to 'Daily Show, Jon Stewart, racism, voter suppression, aasif mandvi' - edited by xxovercastxx

You need to read what 3/5 mean.

Your just pissed that this law does nothing wrong except puts 1 extra step in voting by having to have an ID.

And if you are too lazy to get an Id then you probably don't have a clue on whats going on and should not vote anyway.

Lazy dumb Democrats. Any you want to stand for them.

I suspect, bob, that you probably couldn't even convert 3/5 to decimal, so I hope you'll forgive me if I choose not take your advice on the 3/5ths compromise. I'm sure you didn't even know it was a compromise and not just some liberal hoax.

Yeah, if you're going to accuse someone of being dumb, you might want to check yourself first that you've got the whole basic spelling thing down.

"Your <sic> just pissed".... you sure you're not just projecting? We've seen before how your spelling and grammar get even worse than usual when you're upset.

Back to actual issues since you seem intent on bathing in distractions and logical fallacies. Yet again, I notice that you fail to even talk about the whole voter fraud issue. Once again, you seem to focus on the whole lazy aspect, just like your buddy in the video here. It seems a bigot's weakness is just to let them talk and they admit to their desires of disenfranchising citizens.

Keep it up with that GOP strategy of including people by accusing them of laziness. I see you're taking notes from Romney on that. Got any other comments on the 47% that he forgot about? I'm sure that strategy is working out for you so well in the elections.

Thanks for proving the Daily Show's point. Really saves time

One extra step means that those who do not read the newspaper or whatever means are needed to be INFORMED about this law will find themselves shit out of luck coming election day.

What helps being informed? Wealth. Wealth = Education. Education = Literacy. Literacy = Reading the News etc.

Result: Poor = Disenfranchised.

Consequence: More Republican Votes.

(Excuse the caps. I got on a roll and had to keep going with it)

Oh, well if that's the test, why don't we just have a mandatory test before you can go vote which asks simple questions most voters should know the answers to.

What country was Obama born in?

Who will benefit from the ACA the most?

If taxes were doubled on the top 1% of Americans, would that help, or hurt, middle and lower income voters?

Did man evolve, or were we created this way?

I think we can weed quite a few Republicans out of the voting pool that way.

If it affected all citizens equally or if it were really about voting irregularities, it would require a separate free voter ID that everyone would have to go get at the DMV in person (not made available at AAA with no wait), not a drivers license that people that can't afford a car often don't have and that those who can afford a car often already have. That would be closer to equal and fair.
Then we could see how lazy the republicans are too, or more likely what giant crybabies they are when their draconian laws apply to them too.

The guy indicated that the ID is free.

And like I said earlier, Time will tell.

Still the delusion is in you head.
You see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. If you you wear a Republican shirt you are a racist bigot and if you are a Tea Party type then you are that and also wish to bring back hanging.

Well my friend you need to stop watching MSNBC

There is nothing about voter fraud in this video, except in your head.

Still you have yet to learn what the 3/5 clause is about, which I have quoted long ago.

The guy is (was) a GOP spokesperson, and therefore anything he says is more than a little suspect. Where I live, an ID costs at least $15 + a day or more at the DMV. Of course, we don't have voter ID laws here.
And to answer your reply to VoodooV: All voter ID laws/bills have been clearly and repeatedly associated with the CLAIM that they are about stopping voter fraud. It's the ONLY "legitimate" reason for them (and it's only "legitimate" if you can falsely convince people it's happening, which it is not in any meaningful way). This video is the first time I've heard the GOP admit it's about democratic voter suppression, until now it's ALWAYS been about voter fraud.
I hope you're right, time will tell, and there's still time for 'community activists' to form and implement a plan to get disadvantaged people the ID they need to vote at no cost to them. That doesn't mean they will, but they certainly should.

What business is it of yours whether someone is lazy? Why should that exclude them from voting? Is this a competition about who wants to vote more something? Are we going to have its-a-knockout style competitions? If someone is too lazy or dumb you don't think they deserve a vote? I'm smarter than you, should i get to say whether you vote or not?

How is it good for the democratic process to make it harder to participate? Can you take me through how that is a neutral step for democracy such as America is supposed to be? Making it MORE DIFFICULT to be involved?