Hacker News Reader

Comment by rtkwe | Hacker News Reader

There's a lot of reasons but the number one one is because there's only a two party system here in the US and the Republican one by it's policies and histories is almost entirely reliant on non-white voters not showing up in the electorate. It's not quiet, in NC they've explicitly targeted voting days and locations that are predominantly Democratic and non-white [0]. Second is just our whole system, the states are independent and run their own voting so tracking movement between states is harder in places that having intentionally done something like motorvotor (where ID and voter registration happen together). [1]

[0] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/north-carolina-voter-id/

[1] Again generally opposed by Republicans because it would mean more voters which demographically isn't good for them.

View on HN

> Republican one by it's policies and histories is almost entirely reliant on non-white voters not showing up in the electorate

You could make the literal exact argument in reverse with at least as much credibility.

You had the chance to do just that and ended up not making an effort. It seems far fetched to think anyone could become president without a sizable chunk of white voters in the US just based on the census demographic data.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045219

Well given that whites are a majority of the population, it makes sense that the president would need a sizable chunk of that populace. What am I missing here?

It would be factually incorrect to say the Democrats have a history or desire to disenfranchise white voters. You can not become president without a chunk of the majority demographic’s support. Hopefully that helps shine light on whatever you are missing.

Right, I understand that. I just don't understand the point you are trying to make in the context of the discussion.

You understand my point if you understand the two sentences I had the desire to type out on the topic. I wasn't responding to the full context of the grandparent's post. I was responding to the weak attempt at saying the Democrats and Republicans are the reverse sides of the same coin. Democrats have no desire to disenfranchise the same way Republicans do as it doesn't benefit them. They may try other ways to skew the results towards them but this tactic isn't used by them.

Sure, let me make it here: better watch out for those Democrats encouraging traditionally poorly represented groups to get out and have their voices heard. /s

It doesn't really have the same ring, does it.

Is that supposed to be a rebuttal? That's just a corollary. Yes - what you just said is logically consistent.

You could, and then you'd get up to the 60s, and... then you couldn't anymore.

I notice that you say you could but you actually didn't...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com