Dems court danger with R-word

Do Democrats understand how much they hurt themselves when they say it’s racist to want to have people present photo ID in order to vote?

A recent Monmouth University poll, consistent with earlier polls, reported that an overwhelming 80% of Americans support presenting photo ID in order to be able to cast a vote. There are few other issues that unite such a huge majority.

Nor are the 4 out of 5 Americans alone.

Almost all democracies require voters to prove their identity, many of them requiring photo ID. That is not a huge burden in the large part of Europe where people must carry national identity cards. 

Back in the United States, Democrats argue that requiring photo ID reduces access to the ballot box for minorities, the poor, students, the rural. There may be a smidgen of truth in that, but age and registration requirements also “restrict” access to the ballot box. There must be some rules.

Democrats say that Republicans believe the changes will benefit them. Let’s be real — they may. But that in itself is no reason to disqualify them. Democrats want to give the vote to felons in prisons because they believe it will benefit them. The idea should be discussed on its own merits.

Most perniciously, Democrats say wanting photo ID is “racist,” or, as in the words of President Biden, who was talking about several voting measures, “Jim Crow on steroids.”

It’s “Jim Eagle,” he said, confounding friends and confusing foes. 

That’s Jim Dandy.

My question is this: How do the 80% of Americans — including a majority of Democrats — who approve of photo ID, like being called “racist”? 

When photo ID is required for so much of daily life — from boarding a plane to cashing a check to entering many government buildings, such as Philadelphia’s City Hall — how can anyone rationally argue that it is “racist”?

The Democrats’ hyperbole isn’t designed to convince, because references to voting rules being anti-democratic are laughable.

The media doesn’t help when it describes almost any voting rule as a “restriction, ” which is subjective and partisan, when voting “change” would be more accurate. 

About a decade ago, I remember some journalists claiming there was “no” voter fraud. That changed when cases of voter fraud were proven, and the language became “no large-scale voting fraud.” Kind of like how “global warming” changed into “climate change.”

While it is not proven that voter fraud has ever changed the results of an election, why should we wait for that to happen? Voter ID is a precaution, like fire insurance. You don’t expect to have a fire, you just want to be prepared.

It’s one thing to oppose an idea or a person. It’s something else to go nuclear with mindless demonization, and may explain why both political parties can claim only a minor percentage of the American public. 

According to the latest polling by Gallup, 44% of Americans identify as independents while only 30% call themselves Democrats and 24% identify themselves as Republicans.

Those numbers are pretty embarrassing.

And if each party keeps insulting the intelligence of its members, they will devolve into nothingness.