the reason why republicans want kavanaugh

[Mr Puggsly]

deskpro2k3 said:

Mr Puggsly said:

That's funny, I looked up states have a voter ID or deemed the most strict. It turns out some of those states have the highest voter turnouts in the country. By your logic, it should be the other way around.

I don't buy the argument that acquiring ID is a huge burden for voting and some states deemed strict actually have high voter turnouts. Dems like to boast their voters are so educated, they should be able to figure out how to get an ID.

I'm lost on what you're saying about gerrymandering. That affects who gets elected in those districts.

I was talking about Texas and their voting procedures to give you an idea of how they work, because I thought you didn't know.

So back to the question. How do you expect the vote turnout to not be different if the distracts is gerrymandered against minorities?

Let me explain something just to make sure we're on the same page...

Voter turnout means the number or percentage of people that actually came out to vote. Hence, I'm pointing out states with strict voting laws surprisingly have higher voter turnouts than some states considered not strict. Dems argue voter ID lowers voter turnout, but clearly there are other factors like lack of interest.

There really isn't a significant link (if at all) between voter turnout and gerrymandering. Gerrymandering affects who is elected in districts.