the whole discussion is absolutely absurd in the first place, its not even worth debating for a minute

people need ID for a lot of things, but its suddenly racist when required for voting?

the left wing arguments are literally racist, they are basically saying that minorities are too dumb to get it

providing ID for election has to be mandatory, if you want to call yourself a developed country

end of story

literally not a single person said or even suggested that minorities are "too dumb" to get an ID.
pointing out the fact that 25% of black voters don't have a valid, government-issued photo-ID is not "racist". you're projecting hard.

what reasonable people here are saying is that introducing laws to require IDs (despite voter fraud, that could be prevented by that, being basically non-existent), should only even be considered AFTER the 11% of americans, who currently don't have one, received it.
but that would, of course, defeat the real purpose of voter ID laws, which is to disenfranchise minorities and poor people even further. i know that, republicans know that, democrats know that, and i bet even you do. i refuse to believe that anyone could possibly be dumb enough not to see right through that...

Or you could look into the cases where it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that which IDs are accepted, which locations are limited, etc. is based on racial data.

The go-to is North Carolina, where the judge in that case described the targeting of minorities with "surgical precision".

Laws don't have to say "blacks can't vote" to be racist. I can easily look up racial demographics for different types of ID usage, and then exclude the ones that are used by more black people than white people, thereby making it more difficult for black people to vote, and that's exactly what they do when they craft these laws.

Americans have a right to make their opinions heard via the democratic process. In this, they clearly have.

If one doesn't check ID, no one is caught. And if one does check, is it likely that anyone is going to try and impersonate them? The situation is set-up such that it's incredibly unlikely that anyone would actually be caught and/or charged with in-person voter fraud. As it is, though, it's far more important to make sure that these steps are taken with mail-in ballots, where fraud is far more likely.

How can you justify abortion? "A liberal's choice to permanently take away an innocent's choice".
Sums up your sick platform.

you're evading my question. does that mean you support stricter gun laws, $15 minimum wage, and the abolition of the electoral college? because most americans do. or is that only your 'argument' when you happen to agree with the majority?

btw, none of the lawmakers pushing the voting restrictions in georgia ran explicitly on doing that afaik.

it's amazing how not ONE of the countless legal challenges and the manual re-counts produced ANY evidence of systematic voter fraud, yet you uncritically regurgitate the bs about the importance of undertaking drastic moves, that everyone knows will lead to massive disenfranchisement of certain groups, in order to 'protect' the elections against that non-existent fraud.

it's absurd, dishonest, undemocratic, and fundamentally unamerican - the republican party in a nutshell.

I answered you. They have the right to pursue those things via the democratic process. The only limiting factor is that they must pass constitutional muster.

You have not explained why this will lead to disenfranchisement. IDs in Georgia are free. If someone cannot be bothered to jump through this sort of minor hoop, that boils down to a personal decision not to vote.

so if joe biden introduces stricter gun laws, you will be in favour of that because most americans support it? good to know.
were you in favour of progressives pushing for $15 minimum wage btw? i could look it up in the threads, but i'm too lazy right now tbh...

I'm not sure you understood what I said. But as for gun laws, I am fine with background checks as long as they carve out significant exemptions for family and friends.

States are exactly the place where minimum wage laws should be passed. It's economically backwards, but we live in a society that allows us to make economically backward decisions.

"it's economically backwards" is entirely irrelevant according to your own logic. i mean, it's wrong anyway, but even if it was right, you'd have to dismiss it - at least that's what you did with the arguments against the GQP's voter suppression laws. the only 'argument' you accept as legitimate is "the people want it" (based on a poll in which participants probably assumed everyone had a valid ID anyway, but whatever).