About that election commision

NAACP Lawyer: Trump’s Presidency Was Driven by the ‘Browning of America’

Did she mean to refer to the motives of the voters who supported Trump, his campaign, or the actions and agenda of his presidency so far?

Any two?

All three?

Anyway, in part, surely, that claim is right, whichever it is, though regarding all three I do think she's wrongly ignoring many other factors.

Janai Nelson, the Associate Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said Saturday on MSNBC’s “AM Joy” that the “clear browning of America” led to President Trump’s election.

“[W]hat drove this entire presidency is the fact that there is a clear browning of America,” Nelson stated. 

“Black and Latino voters are going to dominate the electorate if they are able to vote — if they are included in our democracy in a way that is proper and fair.”

Nope. Not yet.

Whites will be a majority of voting Americans for a while, yet.

But even shutting the door to just nonwhite immigration would only slow that browning down, since it's largely due to differing fertility rates among the races and not so much to immigration.

Given abortion in America is significantly slowing that browning, by the way, unyielding Republican opposition to abortion undermines charges they or their agenda are driven by racism.

She went on to say that Trump’s election commission is “doing everything possible to erect barriers” to set people of color back.

There is no actual evidence they are doing anything for that purpose, and it is actually incredible on its face.

The GOP supports a variety of moves tending to disenfranchise a number of sliver demographics a majority of whose voting members are reasonably presumed to vote Democratic.

It is clear enough that excluding Democrats is the actual point, though in no case is the demographic targeted explicitly just Democrats per se.

And though in each case more Democrats than others are excluded, some others are also excluded.

New Hampshire, for example, allows students from out of state to vote only if they get a New Hampshire driver's license, a move disenfranchising a population including Republicans as well as Democrats, but more Democrats than Republicans.

And, as it happens, a move that disenfranchises significantly more whites than nonwhites, though no one supposes that is the point merely because that is the effect.

But with no actual evidence at all it is the entrenched claim, entirely uncontested on the left and not much contested anywhere but on the right, and not at all credible on its face, that voter ID laws not only disenfranchise more blacks than whites but also that that is the point.

And yet it is surely true that many whites would regard that, though not as the point, as at any rate a welcome side effect.

Well, maybe just as an amusing side effect.