>>If you actually think we do not have a voter suppression problem her then you are simply clueless about the facts of the matter...and from where you're sitting (which is of course not here) I suppose I can understand that.

In real life, I've presented several pertinent facts that you ignore in preference for this sort of taunt. That tactic worked before Trump got in, but since then people expect actual arguments rather than "only people in my bubble are clever, the rest of you deplorables are clueless".

As for where I'm sitting: you don't know where I'm sitting... and next I suppose you'll assert that people can't decide for themselves whether they like music, only musicians can.

The FACT is that after litigants forced your narrative all the way to the SC, the SC ruled that Ohio's efforts to remove ineligible voters are permissible and proper and do not disenfranchise voters.

So it seems the your view that poor voters are so incompetent that without your protection they probably can't even find their own left foot, is struck down by your highest court. Imagine the clamor if something Trump said was struck down by the SC and he kept saying it! Fake News would compete for the most sensational article claiming he's told 1,334,165 lies in the last 3 seconds and needs to be impeached. QED.

As I keep saying, apart from being struck down by the highest court in the land your narrative seems patronsizing/insulting and racist... and having forced it all the way to the SC, at some point you need to stop and look in the mirror.