What is concerning and not so concerning about the Georgia Election Reform Law

[AU9377 4,912]

The focus of most of the commentary surrounding the Georgia Elections law recently signed by Gov. Kemp has been misplaced.  The overall reduction in the number of ballot drop boxes in the most populated counties gets a lions share of the attention but, in my opinion, shouldn't result in voter suppression.  The number of early voting days has actually been increased by one day in most counties.  There were big changes made to the absentee ballot verification methods used. Georgia will no longer use a system of signature verification and will instead require a copy of the voter's identification card, drivers license etc be included with the returned ballot.  That actually seems less secure than the current signature match system, but six one and half dozen the other.  I can't see where that will dramatically impact voters or suppress the votes of minorities across the state.

That doesn't mean that the bill is without problems, serious problems.  Those problems are getting little attention, but have the potential to place partisan politics above the rights of voters.  The bill removes the Secretary of State as the head of the State Elections Board and replaces him with a political appointment. That person is then empowered to remove local election officials over the objection of individual counties.  How would that have impacted the most recent elections? Nobody knows for certain, but common sense tells us that a political appointee serves at the pleasure of the governor and would be much more likely to yield to improper influence than would a constitutionally elected Secretary of State that the Governor has no ability to remove from office.  When a sitting U.S. President of the same party calls and tells that appointee that they need to find 11,000 votes and change the outcome of the election, who is secure enough to say no?

This bill also places local election supervisors in very weak positions to rebuke efforts by state officials to tamper with local results. In fact, if local election supervisors are challenged, they will face paying their own attorney's fees for simply defending the decisions of their local elections board. That is pathetic.

The bill entered silly land when they made handing out water to people in line to vote a misdemeanor.  They could have required that anyone or group offering refreshments not have campaign shirts on etc, but they instead decided to make the act criminal .   Again, pathetic.

[CoffeeTiger 5,082]

What happened was that Republicans in Georgia lost, and that's a problem because Georgia is supposed to be a Red state and is supposed to deliver Republican Presidents and legislators to Congress, and that didn't happen this time ....so something must be changed!

 

Like you pointed out, one change is to strip power from the office of the Secretary of State, which Republicans were outraged at for claiming Georgia's elections were fair, that no fraud was found,  and for not doing enough to try and challenge and delay the vote counting. If a Republican Secretary of State is going to go rogue and just let Democrats claim a victory in Georgia, R's need to make sure that doesn't happen again. Give more power to a lower level appointee who can be more easily influenced to ensure desired outcomes. 

 

Requiring copies of id is certainly a more difficult process for voting than just a signature. I know I don't have a copier at my house, I'd have to go to a store or somewhere and probably pay someone to make a copy to include with my ballot. That's certainly more difficult than just a matching signature, which is entirely the point of the Bill, to make voting just a little bit more inconvenient and time consuming.  

The whole water thing is a silly part of the Bill. Some Georgia lawmakers  are trying to argue that the Bill only prevents partisan campaigns from giving out food/water, but that's not how the Bill is actually written and just further proves that Georgia was intentionally trying to push the bill through as fast as possible without properly vetting it.   

 

Republicans aren't even trying to pretend that they aren't changing voter laws to better favor them BECAUASE they lost this most recent election.

[AU9377 4,912]

6 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

What happened was that Republicans in Georgia lost, and that's a problem because Georgia is supposed to be a Red state and is supposed to deliver Republican Presidents and legislators to Congress, and that didn't happen this time ....so something must be changed!

 

Like you pointed out, one change is to strip power from the office of the Secretary of State, which Republicans were outraged at for claiming Georgia's elections were fair, that no fraud was found,  and for not doing enough to try and challenge and delay the vote counting. If a Republican Secretary of State is going to go rogue and just let Democrats claim a victory in Georgia, R's need to make sure that doesn't happen again. Give more power to a lower level appointee who can be more easily influenced to ensure desired outcomes. 

 

Requiring copies of id is certainly a more difficult process for voting than just a signature. I know I don't have a copier at my house, I'd have to go to a store or somewhere and probably pay someone to make a copy to include with my ballot. That's certainly more difficult than just a matching signature, which is entirely the point of the Bill, to make voting just a little bit more inconvenient and time consuming.  

The whole water thing is a silly part of the Bill. Some Georgia lawmakers  are trying to argue that the Bill only prevents partisan campaigns from giving out food/water, but that's not how the Bill is actually written and just further proves that Georgia was intentionally trying to push the bill through as fast as possible without properly vetting it.   

 

Republicans aren't even trying to pretend that they aren't changing voter laws to better favor them BECAUASE they lost this most recent election.

I agree. I see the copy of I.D. part being easier and more susceptible to fraud for one reason.  Groups assisting people with requesting ballots and voting absentee will carry a printer with them.  At least with signature verification, you know with certainty that at one point the person voting signed their registration card.  Every signature is verified and if it is remotely close, it gets reviewed by more than one person.  If rejected, the person can them come in and verify that it is their signature.  Under the new law, people just include a copy of the i.d. and no more questions.  As someone who has worked with elections for years, the i.d. copy just seems easier on both ends.  I can see why some would say it isn't. 

In either event, you are correct, they would have changed nothing had the Republicans not lost in November and January.

[AUFAN78 3,889]

Georgia on Everyone’s Mind - The Morning Dispatch

The elections process in Georgia has been the source of much partisan bickering in recent years, with politicians on both sides of the political aisle claiming foul play when certain races didn’t go their way. 

In 2018, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams refused to concede to now-Gov. Brian Kemp—despite losing by more than 50,000 votes—because she claimed Kemp, as secretary of state, had purged hundreds of thousands from the voter rolls. Former President Trump lost the Peach State last year by just under 12,000 votes, but he never admitted it, claiming instead that tens of thousands of undocumented, dead, and/or out-of-state voters illegally cast ballots for Joe Biden.

It should therefore come as no surprise that when Kemp signed Senate Bill 202 (SB 202) last week, the omnibus elections legislation immediately became a partisan lightning rod. Within minutes, Abrams released a statement claiming the legislation “suppresses voters, criminalizes compassion & seizes election authority from local + state officials.” The following day, President Biden issued a statement decrying the law as “un-American” and “Jim Crow in the 21st Century.”

The accusation from Biden is a serious one. From the late 19th to the mid-20th century, states across the South passed Jim Crow laws to codify segregation and disenfranchise black voters. At a constitutional convention in 1877, lawmakers in Georgia implemented a cumulative poll tax, requiring would-be voters pay a fee before casting a ballot. In 1907, Georgia Gov. Hoke Smith signed a bill amending the state constitution to create a literacy test for voting—but anyone descended from a Confederate or Union soldier was exempt. A year later, Georgia’s Democratic Party joined other Southern states in establishing a “white primary” that explicitly prohibited black voters from participating. Jim Crow laws were real, and a dark stain on American history.

But attempts by prominent Democrats—including the president—to tie SB 202 to the Jim Crow era are incredibly disingenuous. For starters, the bill actually expands voting access for most Georgians, mandating precincts hold at least 17 days of early voting—including two Saturdays, with Sundays optional—leading up to the election. Voting locations during this period must be open for at least eight hours, and can operate between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Several states (including Biden’s home state of Delaware, which will not implement it until 2022) do not currently allow any in-person early voting, and plenty, like New Jersey, offer far fewer than 17 days.

Despite Biden saying the bill implements absentee voting restrictions that “effectively deny” the franchise to “countless” voters, SB 202 leaves in place no-excuse absentee voting with a few tweaks. It tightens the window to apply for an absentee ballot to “just” 67 days, and mandates applications—which can now be completed online—be received by election officials at least 11 days before an election to ensure a ballot can be mailed and returned by Election Day. The bill requires Georgia’s secretary of state to make a blank absentee ballot application available online, but prohibits government agencies from mailing one to voters unsolicited—and requires third-party groups doing so to include a variety of disclaimers.  

Rather than signature matching—which is time-intensive for election officials—voters will verify their identity in absentee ballot applications by including the identification number on their driver’s license or voter identification card, which is free. If a Georgian has neither, he or she can, pursuant to Georgia Code Section 21-2-417, include a photocopy or digital picture of a “current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document” that includes his or her name and address.* When mailing back their ballots, voters must print their driver’s license number (or the last four digits of their social security number) on an inner envelope. (An August 2016 Gallup survey found photo ID requirements for voting were overwhelmingly popular: 80 percent of voters supported them, including 77 percent of nonwhite voters.) SB 202 also codifies ballot drop boxes into law; Georgia added them for the first time in 2020 as a pandemic measure, and the law now stipulates that there be one for every 100,000 registered voters or advance voting locations in a county, whichever is smaller.

Among other things (it’s a 95-page bill!), SB 202 allows election workers to begin processing absentee ballots two weeks before an election to avoid reporting delays, and requires them to announce the total number of ballots cast—in-person, absentee, early, and provisional—by 10:00 p.m. on election night so voters know how many outstanding votes remain to be counted. It also restructures the State Election Board, demoting the secretary of state from chair to a non-voting member. 

One minor provision that’s received outsized attention is a prohibition on outside groups or people distributing money, gifts, food, or drinks to voters within 150 feet of a polling place or 25 feet of voters standing in line to vote. Polling places, however, can make self-service water receptacles available to voters waiting in line.

At some level, Democrats’ knee-jerk opposition to GOP-led election reforms makes sense after Donald Trump and his allies spent months campaigning to actually disenfranchise millions of voters across the country, often advancing far-fetched conspiracies as part of their efforts. In many ways, SB 202 was borne of Republican lawmakers in Georgia facing immense pressure from their voters to “do something” about the election fraud the former president insisted was rampant. And early in the drafting process, some proposals floating around in the state legislature were highly questionable. These included eliminating no-excuse absentee voting entirely and prohibiting early voting on Sundays (which critics decried as targeting “souls to the polls” drives at black churches). But even though those suggestions didn’t make it into the final package, some Democrats continue to pretend that they did.

Those provisions—says Gabriel Sterling, the Republican election official who came to prominence for speaking out against GOP election disinformation back in December—“were phantoms that the leadership in both the Senate and the House told their guys, ‘Hey, introduce whatever you need to to cover yourself with your people.’ Now, I think that’s a terrible idea. But one thing I don’t know if I could express to your readers enough ... is in the Republican base, the level of anger, and fear, and sorrow, and despair.”

“I can’t put into words the level that these elected representatives are dealing with,” he continued. “And to a degree, we have a representative democracy for a reason: You respond to the fears and concerns of your voters.” Somewhere around 65 percent of Republican voters still don’t believe Joe Biden was “legitimately elected” last November.

Unfortunately, Democrats also appear to be engaging in election disinformation for their own political gain. Abrams’ Fair Fight voting rights group secured the JimCrow2.com domain on March 10, more than two weeks before Kemp signed SB 202 into law. Just yesterday, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki doubled down on Biden’s misleading claims about the bill, which the Washington Post fact checker had already deemed worthy of “Four Pinocchios.”

Sterling—who has been at war with his own party for months over this stuff—sounded exasperated on the phone yesterday. “Look, [Democrats] have found a wonderful fundraising and turnout model based on one particular thing,” he said. “Voter suppression, voter suppression, racist voter suppression. And it works! … It worked in Georgia in 2020, [and] it’s part of the rationale also behind H.R. 1.”

“This is not a bill I think is the best bill in the whole world,” Sterling added, noting there was plenty he would have written differently—particularly the State Election Board section, which he deemed “pure politics and payback” targeting his boss, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. “All I think is it’s not ‘Jim Crow 2.0.’”

A day after dozens of black business executives called on corporate America to vocally oppose the legislation, several major companies based in Georgia—which had until then remained above the fray—did exactly that. “The Coca-Cola Company does not support this legislation, as it makes it harder for people to vote, not easier,” CEO James Quincey said. Ed Bastian, chief executive at Delta Airlines, wrote that he “need[s] to make it crystal clear that the final bill is unacceptable and does not match Delta’s values.” Some progressive activists have gone further, calling for various economic boycotts of the state—and Biden himself joined them in an interview with ESPN earlier this week.

“I would strongly support them doing that,” Biden said when asked by Sage Steele about Major League Baseball considering moving its annual All-Star game out of Atlanta this summer. “This is Jim Crow on steroids, what they’re doing in Georgia.”

Sterling wasn’t pleased. “I think it’s morally reprehensible and disgusting that he’s perpetuating economic blackmail over a lie,” he told The Dispatch. “It’s a lie. This is no different than the lie of Trump saying there was voter fraud in this state. And the people who are going to be most hurt by [a boycott] are the workers in all of these places that are going to be impacted.”

Abrams seemed to acknowledge that latter point in a USA Today op-ed published Wednesday, agreeing with Biden’s overall assessment of SB 202, but pumping the brakes on further action. “I have no doubt that voters of color, particularly Black voters, are willing to endure the hardships of boycotts. But I don’t think that’s necessary—yet,” she wrote. “Leaving us behind won’t save us. So I ask you to bring your business to Georgia and, if you’re already here, stay and fight. Stay and vote.”

It may make financial sense for businesses to take this stance—their key advertising demographic skews younger and more liberal—but that doesn’t mean Republicans aren’t going to point out the hypocrisy. “Dear @Delta: You are business partners with the Communist Party of #China,” Sen. Marco Rubio tweeted yesterday. “When can we expect your letter saying that their ongoing genocide in #Xinjiang is ‘unacceptable and does not match Delta’s values’???”

[AUFAN78 3,889]

Why State Election Reform Bills Don’t Signal a New Jim Crow Era

People are bickering over measures that were considered normal just a few years ago.

Walter Olson

Apr 2

51

285

 

(Photograph by Megan Varner/Getty Images)

The Washington Post's fact checker has awarded President Joe Biden four Pinocchios for saying that a new Georgia law would “end voting at five o’clock when working people are just getting off work”—it won’t—and then repeating the untrue claim in similar words the next day.

When it comes to stretching the facts about the legislation recently passed in Georgia, Biden is far from alone. The law, widely portrayed as a horrendous venture into so-called voter suppression, actually contains many provisions that liberalize access to ballot methods that came in handy during the pandemic, such as early voting, as well as addressing the genuine problem of long lines at polling places. 

Post columnist Henry Olsen ably rebuts the main claims and calls the new law “a decent attempt to balance voter access and election integrity” that “has been unfairly and maliciously maligned.” (For simple explainers about the law's main provisions, see this one from Georgia Public Broadcasting, or this one from Business Insider.) Regarding a much-criticized provision on giving items of value to electors waiting in line, Dan McLaughlin at National Review Online emphasizes that other states like New York have long had similarly worded prohibitions without great controversy.

Want another narrative scrambler? On March 29 the heavily Republican Kentucky legislature passed by near-unanimous margins a “significant” bill that, to quote the Courier-Journal, “will make three days of widespread early voting a regular part of the state's future elections and expand people’s access to the ballot in other ways while also instituting new security measures.”

Hold on. Aren’t Republican state legislatures bent on taking shocking, novel, and extreme plunges into a “new Jim Crow” era? Isn’t the result to put in doubt whether America is even going to go on having a system of democracy? Joe Biden went so far as to describe the Georgia bill “Jim Crow on steroids” while endorsing a call to remove the MLB All-Star game from the state.

The left-leaning Brennan Center has driven a lot of coverage with a running survey finding that GOP lawmakers have introduced more than 350 state bills that “would restrict access to the ballot.” That scary-sounding formulation can mean almost anything. In the eyes of the Brennan people, for example, it “restricts access to the ballot” for a state that did 15 days’ worth of early voting during the pandemic—after having never done it at all before 2020—to scale back to doing only 10 days’ worth at the request of county administrators stretched thin. It also means measures to check voter ID, a step widely popular with voters across the board, including those from minority groups.

If the terrain over which people are bickering is solidly within the range of election law considered normal a half dozen years ago, it’s probably not a return of Jim Crow, nor is it likely to spell the end of American democracy. And most of the bickering—on measures likely to pass—is on stuff like this.

That's a related point: Keep your eye mostly on the bills state legislatures pass, not the flotsam any old lawmaker may happen to introduce. Everyday coverage of the doings in state capitals typically spends little time counting the sheer number of bills filed on a topic. There’s a good reason for that. Any backbencher in a state capital can introduce a bill that will never pass or even be seriously considered. Consider Arizona, where one GOP representative has filed a bill that would authorize the legislature to overturn the state’s popular vote for president and substitute its own electors, as Trump forces called for in December. That’s a genuinely horrible idea and needs to be watched, but there's no indication it will emerge from committee.

Why are the bills actually passing in states like Georgia and Kentucky more moderate? One reason is that many of the steps liberalizing absentee, early, and dropbox voting, whatever their other tradeoffs and demands on resources, make life more convenient for voters. Voters like convenience! That goes for many Republicans too, as well as groups like retirees and time-pressed businesspeople who often have the ear of GOP lawmakers.

You should also resist the widely heard theme that the supposed Republican zeal to pass these laws is fueled mostly by Trump’s absurd claim that fraud cost him the 2020 election. Sure, some GOP lawmakers are willing to pander to the stolen-election fantasies of many in the base, especially if all it takes is to introduce a bill. But note again the Georgia experience. The responsible-adult GOP officials in that state—Gov. Brian Kemp, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, and elections director Gabriel Sterling—rightly won applause for standing up to Trump’s false claims, and all have suffered extraordinary ongoing abuse at the hands of the Old Pretender’s camp. None of them echo the national liberal line. Sterling, in particular, who brings much credibility, does not hesitate to criticize some details of the process as imperfect. Still, he writes that “nothing in this bill suppresses anyone’s vote ... nothing. Those saying so are just stirring the pot and raising money. The claim of voter suppression has the same level of truth as the claims of voter fraud in the last election.”

Election administration is an imperfect art with many genuine tradeoffs. Don’t treat ordinary disagreements about them as attempts to destabilize America’s system of majority rule. If American democracy is in peril—and that might be a discussion worth having in light of what happened between November 3 and January 6—laws of this sort are not very good evidence for that proposition.

[AU9377 4,912]

On 4/4/2021 at 11:35 AM, AUFAN78 said:

Why State Election Reform Bills Don’t Signal a New Jim Crow Era

People are bickering over measures that were considered normal just a few years ago.

Walter Olson

Apr 2

51

285

 

(Photograph by Megan Varner/Getty Images)

The Washington Post's fact checker has awarded President Joe Biden four Pinocchios for saying that a new Georgia law would “end voting at five o’clock when working people are just getting off work”—it won’t—and then repeating the untrue claim in similar words the next day.

When it comes to stretching the facts about the legislation recently passed in Georgia, Biden is far from alone. The law, widely portrayed as a horrendous venture into so-called voter suppression, actually contains many provisions that liberalize access to ballot methods that came in handy during the pandemic, such as early voting, as well as addressing the genuine problem of long lines at polling places. 

Post columnist Henry Olsen ably rebuts the main claims and calls the new law “a decent attempt to balance voter access and election integrity” that “has been unfairly and maliciously maligned.” (For simple explainers about the law's main provisions, see this one from Georgia Public Broadcasting, or this one from Business Insider.) Regarding a much-criticized provision on giving items of value to electors waiting in line, Dan McLaughlin at National Review Online emphasizes that other states like New York have long had similarly worded prohibitions without great controversy.

Want another narrative scrambler? On March 29 the heavily Republican Kentucky legislature passed by near-unanimous margins a “significant” bill that, to quote the Courier-Journal, “will make three days of widespread early voting a regular part of the state's future elections and expand people’s access to the ballot in other ways while also instituting new security measures.”

Hold on. Aren’t Republican state legislatures bent on taking shocking, novel, and extreme plunges into a “new Jim Crow” era? Isn’t the result to put in doubt whether America is even going to go on having a system of democracy? Joe Biden went so far as to describe the Georgia bill “Jim Crow on steroids” while endorsing a call to remove the MLB All-Star game from the state.

The left-leaning Brennan Center has driven a lot of coverage with a running survey finding that GOP lawmakers have introduced more than 350 state bills that “would restrict access to the ballot.” That scary-sounding formulation can mean almost anything. In the eyes of the Brennan people, for example, it “restricts access to the ballot” for a state that did 15 days’ worth of early voting during the pandemic—after having never done it at all before 2020—to scale back to doing only 10 days’ worth at the request of county administrators stretched thin. It also means measures to check voter ID, a step widely popular with voters across the board, including those from minority groups.

If the terrain over which people are bickering is solidly within the range of election law considered normal a half dozen years ago, it’s probably not a return of Jim Crow, nor is it likely to spell the end of American democracy. And most of the bickering—on measures likely to pass—is on stuff like this.

That's a related point: Keep your eye mostly on the bills state legislatures pass, not the flotsam any old lawmaker may happen to introduce. Everyday coverage of the doings in state capitals typically spends little time counting the sheer number of bills filed on a topic. There’s a good reason for that. Any backbencher in a state capital can introduce a bill that will never pass or even be seriously considered. Consider Arizona, where one GOP representative has filed a bill that would authorize the legislature to overturn the state’s popular vote for president and substitute its own electors, as Trump forces called for in December. That’s a genuinely horrible idea and needs to be watched, but there's no indication it will emerge from committee.

Why are the bills actually passing in states like Georgia and Kentucky more moderate? One reason is that many of the steps liberalizing absentee, early, and dropbox voting, whatever their other tradeoffs and demands on resources, make life more convenient for voters. Voters like convenience! That goes for many Republicans too, as well as groups like retirees and time-pressed businesspeople who often have the ear of GOP lawmakers.

You should also resist the widely heard theme that the supposed Republican zeal to pass these laws is fueled mostly by Trump’s absurd claim that fraud cost him the 2020 election. Sure, some GOP lawmakers are willing to pander to the stolen-election fantasies of many in the base, especially if all it takes is to introduce a bill. But note again the Georgia experience. The responsible-adult GOP officials in that state—Gov. Brian Kemp, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, and elections director Gabriel Sterling—rightly won applause for standing up to Trump’s false claims, and all have suffered extraordinary ongoing abuse at the hands of the Old Pretender’s camp. None of them echo the national liberal line. Sterling, in particular, who brings much credibility, does not hesitate to criticize some details of the process as imperfect. Still, he writes that “nothing in this bill suppresses anyone’s vote ... nothing. Those saying so are just stirring the pot and raising money. The claim of voter suppression has the same level of truth as the claims of voter fraud in the last election.”

Election administration is an imperfect art with many genuine tradeoffs. Don’t treat ordinary disagreements about them as attempts to destabilize America’s system of majority rule. If American democracy is in peril—and that might be a discussion worth having in light of what happened between November 3 and January 6—laws of this sort are not very good evidence for that proposition.

All of that ignores the real problem with the bill.  The bill strips the Secretary of State of his oversight of Georgia elections.  That is the problem.

[AUFAN78 3,889]

11 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

All of that ignores the real problem with the bill.  The bill strips the Secretary of State of his oversight of Georgia elections.  That is the problem.

The claim by the democrats and the media is voter suppression. The article addresses it explicitly.

[AU9377 4,912]

30 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

The claim by the democrats and the media is voter suppression. The article addresses it explicitly.

I get that.  I also agree that those provisions don't result voter suppression.  However, there is a bigger problem with the bill that many are ignoring. The bill puts a political appointee as the head of the State Board of Elections and removes the SOS.  After that, it gives this partisan appointee increased authority over local election officials.  The danger is that the next time a sitting President calls and tells an election official to find 11,000 votes, will they do the right thing and say no or will they cave?

[CoffeeTiger 5,082]

 

On 4/4/2021 at 10:35 AM, AUFAN78 said:

 

You should also resist the widely heard theme that the supposed Republican zeal to pass these laws is fueled mostly by Trump’s absurd claim that fraud cost him the 2020 election. Sure, some GOP lawmakers are willing to pander to the stolen-election fantasies of many in the base, especially if all it takes is to introduce a bill. But note again the Georgia experience. The responsible-adult GOP officials in that state—Gov. Brian Kemp, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, and elections director Gabriel Sterling—rightly won applause for standing up to Trump’s false claims, and all have suffered extraordinary ongoing abuse at the hands of the Old Pretender’s camp. None of them echo the national liberal line. Sterling, in particular, who brings much credibility, does not hesitate to criticize some details of the process as imperfect. Still, he writes that “nothing in this bill suppresses anyone’s vote ... nothing. Those saying so are just stirring the pot and raising money. The claim of voter suppression has the same level of truth as the claims of voter fraud in the last election.”

 

Ok.....so then why was Georgia in such a hurry to do a sweeping  reform Bill for their voting system immediately after losing an election where over half of Republicans TO THIS DAY believe there was widespread voter fraud? The GOP says this is all to do with "Voter Integrity", but that wasn't really a national GOP concern until Trump and Co started touting the 'Big Fraud' Lie, then all of a sudden "Voting integrity" is on the lips of every major Republican lawmaker, and suddenly voting laws must all be 'fixed' clarified', etc. They also say it's to increase confidence in our voting system, but..again.. the only people in America who aren't confident in our voting system's are the same ones peddling Trump's lies.  

I don't understand how this author is saying we shouldn't make the obvious connection, but then offer no real reason or justification himself for why this law was pushed through in the first place? 

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-disinformation/half-of-republicans-believe-false-accounts-of-deadly-u-s-capitol-riot-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN2BS0RZ

I know some less extreme Conservatives like @AUFAN78 and this author like to continually say that "Trump's actually not THAT popular with Republicans" "We aren't a Trump party", "him and his craziness is all old news". When poll, after poll, after poll continually says that by and large most Republicans still love Trump, believe that Trump was cheated out of re-election, and want Trump to be a bit part of the GOP moving forward.

You always try to disassociate Trump with todays GOP, and maybe you personally wish that was the case, but you are in a minority of your own party. 

 

[AUFAN78 3,889]

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

I get that.  I also agree that those provisions don't result voter suppression.  However, there is a bigger problem with the bill that many are ignoring. The bill puts a political appointee as the head of the State Board of Elections and removes the SOS.  After that, it gives this partisan appointee increased authority over local election officials.  The danger is that the next time a sitting President calls and tells an election official to find 11,000 votes, will they do the right thing and say no or will they cave?

Remind me, do you support HR1?

[AUFAN78 3,889]

49 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Ok.....so then why was Georgia in such a hurry to do a sweeping  reform Bill for their voting system immediately after losing an election where over half of Republicans TO THIS DAY believe there was widespread voter fraud? The GOP says this is all to do with "Voter Integrity", but that wasn't really a national GOP concern until Trump and Co started touting the 'Big Fraud' Lie, then all of a sudden "Voting integrity" is on the lips of every major Republican lawmaker, and suddenly voting laws must all be 'fixed' clarified', etc. They also say it's to increase confidence in our voting system, but..again.. the only people in America who aren't confident in our voting system's are the same ones peddling Trump's lies.  

That is simply untrue. Voter integrity has been an issue for years and it is not simply a R concern. Remember Bush v. Gore? 

 

53 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

I know some less extreme Conservatives like @AUFAN78 and this author like to continually say that "Trump's actually not THAT popular with Republicans" "We aren't a Trump party", "him and his craziness is all old news". When poll, after poll, after poll continually says that by and large most Republicans still love Trump, believe that Trump was cheated out of re-election, and want Trump to be a bit part of the GOP moving forward.

You always try to disassociate Trump with todays GOP, and maybe you personally wish that was the case, but you are in a minority of your own party. 

Quote me on any of that please. Good luck!

And understand my independence. I vote my conscience regardless of party. How else could I have voted Obama? Because I am Republican? Check your facts.

[I_M4_AU 7,762]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Ok.....so then why was Georgia in such a hurry to do a sweeping  reform Bill for their voting system immediately after losing an election where over half of Republicans TO THIS DAY believe there was widespread voter fraud?

The bigger question is; why is the Democratic Party in such a hurry to do sweeping reforms after immediately winning a Presidential election and undermining each state’s right to enact their own voting laws in the meantime?

What is the end game here?

[CoffeeTiger 5,082]

12 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

That is simply untrue. Voter integrity has been an issue for years and it is not simply a R concern. Remember Bush v. Gore? 

Really? The best you got is an event from 21 years ago? An event where there was actual real life EVIDENCE that Florida's election process was flawed and caused inconsistent outcomes? The one that Democrats conceded anyway because that was best for the country? 

And yet here we are in 2021 where Republicans use their own accusations of fraud happening AS their evidence of fraud, and then uses their own words and beliefs as a reason to revamp and change voter laws to try and make sure they don't lose elections in the future.  

And specifically Georgia where the Secretary of State came out and said THE ELECTION IS FAIR.....so now we have new Georiga voter laws to strip power away from the Secretary of State. Sounds legit. 

 

 

[AUFAN78 3,889]

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Really? The best you got is an event from 21 years ago? An event where there was actual real life EVIDENCE that Florida's election process was flawed and caused inconsistent outcomes? The one that Democrats conceded anyway because that was best for the country? 

And yet here we are in 2021 where Republicans use their own accusations of fraud happening AS their evidence of fraud, and then uses their own words and beliefs as a reason to revamp and change voter laws to try and make sure they don't lose elections in the future.  

And specifically Georgia where the Secretary of State came out and said THE ELECTION IS FAIR.....so now we have new Georiga voter laws to strip power away from the Secretary of State. Sounds legit. 

 

 

Well I laughed. Thanks!

Now I realize you are rather new here, but what you just did is referred to in these parts as weaseling. Homey would be proud. 

I believe roughly one quarter of our populace believe the elections last year were not fair. Why not seek something that all agrees is fair? Shouldn't that be something all would want? 

[CoffeeTiger 5,082]

52 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

 

I believe roughly one quarter of our populace believe the elections last year were not fair. Why not seek something that all agrees is fair? Shouldn't that be something all would want? 

The problem is that Disagreeing with the outcome doesn’t = unfair elections. 

Like I think Ben Shapiro says:, Facts don’t care about your feelings. 

 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 hour ago, AUFAN78 said:

I believe roughly one quarter of our populace believe the elections last year were not fair. Why not seek something that all agrees is fair? Shouldn't that be something all would want? 

Because we shouldn't acquiesce to one-quarter of the population being so utterly stupid that they bought into a lie.

[AUFAN78 3,889]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

The problem is that Disagreeing with the outcome doesn’t = unfair elections. 

Like I think Ben Shapiro says:, Facts don’t care about your feelings. 

 

As Americans we should strive for 100% belief in the fairness of elections. We can do better and should.

[AUFAN78 3,889]

1 hour ago, Brad_ATX said:

Because we shouldn't acquiesce to one-quarter of the population being so utterly stupid that they bought into a lie.

F unity. I get it. Thanks. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

28 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

F unity. I get it. Thanks. 

When people want to accept facts about our election process, specifically that its one of the most secure in the world, we can start talking about unity.  But continuing to cheer on the dumbing down of America ain't the way.

[AUFAN78 3,889]

1 hour ago, Brad_ATX said:

When people want to accept facts about our election process, specifically that its one of the most secure in the world, we can start talking about unity.  But continuing to cheer on the dumbing down of America ain't the way.

Facts are stubborn, particularly when distorted. See Russia, Ukraine, Kavanaugh, etc. So if one simply tries they can understand skepticism. Now, I'm on record stating my beliefs the elections were not stolen, but that the R's were outworked. Still believe that.  

With regards to unity, we should aspire to that regardless of differences. This is America. We can and should do better. 

Don't get me started on dumbing down America. This topic is peanuts. 

[creed 1,629]

12 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Because we shouldn't acquiesce to one-quarter of the population being so utterly stupid that they bought into a lie.

I see your point, and I agree. But it's just the way things happen and continue to happen in this country. It's even happening in the non political aspects of our lives.

[CoffeeTiger 5,082]

11 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

As Americans we should strive for 100% belief in the fairness of elections. We can do better and should.

No, I understand the point you're making, I just disagree with it.

I think we should strive for secure and fair elections (which the 2020 elections were). If a portion of the population doesn't believe it was, but yet can't provide any evidence, then that's a 'them' problem and it's on 'them' to examine what type of information they are taking in and why they are so easily led to believe easily disproven falsehoods. 

 

[homersapien 11,352]

20 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

The bigger question is; why is the Democratic Party in such a hurry to do sweeping reforms after immediately winning a Presidential election and undermining each state’s right to enact their own voting laws in the meantime?

What is the end game here?

To take us back to the time when the Voting Acts Right of 1965 was still in full force.

[AUFAN78 3,889]

4 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

No, I understand the point you're making, I just disagree with it.

I think we should strive for secure and fair elections (which the 2020 elections were). If a portion of the population doesn't believe it was, but yet can't provide any evidence, then that's a 'them' problem and it's on 'them' to examine what type of information they are taking in and why they are so easily led to believe easily disproven falsehoods. 

 

Yes we do disagree. I find it hard to believe that in this United States of America we can't have elections everyone has confidence in. It just isn't that complicated IMO.

[CoffeeTiger 5,082]

40 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Yes we do disagree. I find it hard to believe that in this United States of America we can't have elections everyone has confidence in. It just isn't that complicated IMO.

I agree it isn't very complicated, but even still, the MAGA crowd doesn't have confidence in the elections, and from what I've seen they aren't really sure why that is themselves. The Republican party actually performed better in the 2020 election than polls and analysts thought, so the GOP will really kill their own momentum if they keep brainwashing their own voting base into thinking that elections are rigged against them.