Daily Beast Lies About North Carolina Laws

I’ve mentioned Vox Day’s book SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down The Thought Police, in which he lays out the rules for dealing with social justice warriors. The First Rule is that SJWs always lie. And, they do, especially since their peeps are gullible enough to fully believe those lies, and they’ll often tell them without proof, and in a manner that the causal reader will not question the lies. Here’s Jay Michelson at the Daily Beast telling a whopper

Voter Suppression Could Stop 1.3 Million from Voting in Swing States
Since the 2008 election, Republican-led state legislatures have passed a dizzying array of laws to keep Democratic groups from voting. Will they make Trump or Cruz president?

First off, let’s note that this screed is about setting the terms for a Democratic Party loss as being about cheating, much like Dems did heavily in 2004. They’ve pulled this to some degree ever since Bush won the election in 2000.

Thanks to new laws passed by Republicans, 1.28 million votes that were cast in the 2012 presidential election won’t be cast in 2016.

That’s because, of the 12 states considered up for grabs in 2016, four—Virginia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Ohio—have passed onerous new voter suppression laws, which disproportionately affect communities of color and other Democratic constituencies.

Democrats sure seem to have a low opinion of Black people, thinking they cannot obtain a proper ID like the White people in the Democratic party. Perhaps these lilly-white Dems think Blacks are just unable to follow the law, thinking them lawless. Dems are pretty racist.

Here comes the big whopper

For example, in North Carolina, the Republican-controlled legislature and Republican governor eliminated early voting days. In 2012, 900,000 voters cast their ballots during the early voting window. In 2016, that number will be zero.

It’s cleverly written to allow Michaelson to dissemble if he’s accused of lying (which I did on Twitter), another trait of SJWs, but, taken at face value, it is utterly wrong. Hence the reason why there is no link to back the assertion. Does Michaelson not think people can look this up on the Internet? He’s expecting that no one will bother, they’ll just read it, call NC racist, and move on.

Alas, it is all a lie. SB 589, which also provides other measures, such as the voter ID requirement, reduced early voting days from 17 to 10, similar to the number of early voting days in quite a few states. The Democratic hotbed of New York allows zero early voting days. Is NY engaged in voter suppression? How about Michigan, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Delaware, all Dem hotbeds?

Also, despite the reduction in days, the change requires counties to “offer the same number of early voting hours in presidential elections as were available in 2012 and an equal number of early voting hours in midterm elections as were offered in 2010.” So, fewer days, but they’ll have more voting stations to make up for it.

How does that equate to zero? How does this mean that NC eliminated early voting? It’s written so Michaelson can say “Oh, I just meant they eliminated 7 voting days.” What will the casual reader think it means? That’s right, that NC did away with all early voting, and they’re supposed to believe that the NC GOP is raaaaacist. Especially when we get this in the next paragraph

In other words, banning early voting could keep this swing state in the Republican column this November.

It’s not banned. Not by a longshot. SJWs always lie.

Of course, we have to have some whining about voter ID

Thirty states require ID of some kind to vote and 15 states require the ID have a photo. But unlike most of those other states, Virginia is one of the twelve swing states that will probably determine the outcome of the presidential election.

Got that? Requiring voter ID is fine in the states that are locks for Democrats, and only matters in swing states. He ends his whiny screed with

In short, none of these laws prevent voter fraud. They prevent voting, mostly for Democrats. And thanks to new laws in four swing states, they might just prevent a Democrat from getting into the White House.

Is he saying that Democrats are too stupid, too incompetent to obtain a proper ID, something that is pretty much required for life in the US? Heck, here in NC one can obtain a free ID. Is that still too expensive for Democrats?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “Daily Beast Lies About North Carolina Laws”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Alas, it is all a lie. SB 589, which also provides other measures, such as the voter ID requirement, reduced early voting days from 17 to 10

    It’s HB 589, not SB 589. And to your credit, you are right and the Beast article wrong!


    Why does requiring photo IDs reduce the number of old, young, poor and minority voters, i.e., mostly Democratic? I don’t know. But it does. Why does any impediment to voting reduce voting?

    What if a state decided to be fiscally responsible and cut the number of polling places and limit hours? Let’s say requiring all polling places to be inside the city limits of cities of pop > 50,000 and polls only open from 5 PM to 2 AM. Rural folks can travel in on voting day or vote absentee.

  2. John says:

    Teach about 1% of the US population lives in nursing homes or assisted living situations
    Do you think they still have or can easily get the IDs required?
    For many poor 18 year olds a drivers license and the driving school (500$) necessary to obtain one is prohibitively expensive
    Was it difficult for you to obtain one?
    If/when you lose your ids is it an expense you can easily afford? Do you think such an expense can easily be afforded by all ? Woukd it be easily my for you to go places to obtain replacements? Do you think that it would be equally easy for all?
    Do you think that everyone who could not do so as easily as you is either stupid or incompetent?

  3. John says:

    Tell me about degree of difficulty in obtaining. A NC if
    What forms of proof are needed?
    How difficult would it be for a physically handicapped person?

Pirate's Cove