• Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The authors found that “polling clerks are more likely to fail to compare a photo ID to the person presenting that document if the person is of a different ethnicity”.

    They also highlighted the case of Andrea Barratt, who is immunocompromised and was blocked from entering a polling booth after refusing to remove her mask for an identification check.

    WTF am I even reading? The problem is that some clerks are too stupid to identify non-white persons? And that someone else refused to take off the mask for 2 seconds to show her face!!?

    At least it’s not the usual racist bullshit from the US where non-white people are allegedly too stupid and/or poor to get an ID…

    • throw4w4y5@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      this was always the plan, since minorities and disabled citizens in the UK tend not to vote conservative.

      • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Meanwhile Labour plan to give people with Settled Status the vote, who they probably expect to vote for them. This cherry picking of the electorate isn’t going to benefit anyone.

        • Shalakushka@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, disenfranchising people is exactly the same as enfranchising people, your big centrist brain has it all figured out

    • SbisasCostlyTurnover@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, for a start it’s a solution without a problem. We don’t really have an issue with voter fraud in the UK. All this has done is disenfranchise people who could previously vote without needing an often costly ID.

        • WellThisIsNew@fjdk.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It costs time and effort, something that disabled people often have less of.

          Voter fraud is extremely low in the UK, and most of what does occur isn’t stopped by these changes (the most common type is, for example, parents submitting a postal vote on behalf of their (18+) children without asking them), So here’s a question for you:

          If the number of people disuaded from voting due to the new ID laws significantly outnumber* the amount of fraud that’s prevented by this law, was the law a positive change?

          *To the point that it has a larger effect on election outcome

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            We’ve had voter I.D. here in Northern Ireland for ages and I haven’t heard any complaints

  • ByteWizard@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    And less votes for their guy, which is the actual problem. Saying minorities can’t get an ID is pure racism. But it’s fine when they do it.