Georgia Governor Kemp signs sweeping voter suppression law
- Thread starter Morrison71
- Start date
I’ve never heard of someone waiting 8 hours, but there is no politician worth waiting 8 hours to vote for.
But using your scenario my first thought would not be “Why is nobody bringing me lunch?”.
Doesn’t fit narrative. Just like people bitching about Iowa reducing their polling hours— to align/exceed those of 40+ other states.
Georgia's top elections official reports record turnout on first day of early primary voting
Brad Raffensperger said that about 30,000 votes have already been cast so far.
www.11alive.com
Early voting sets a turnout record in Georgia primary
In Coweta County, a total of 1,514 absentee ballots were cast in person, 730 absentee ballots by mail have been issued and 141 absentee ballots by mail have been returned, according to Elections Director Ashley Gay.
times-herald.com
This can't be true. Biden and all the Dems on HROT said Georgia is suppressing the vote, and cut polling hours (a lie).Early voting sets a turnout record in Georgia primary
In Coweta County, a total of 1,514 absentee ballots were cast in person, 730 absentee ballots by mail have been issued and 141 absentee ballots by mail have been returned, according to Elections Director Ashley Gay.
'member that time they were discounting absentee ballots and wanting to disqualify bunches of them?
I 'member!!!!
Thread title is Georgia Governor Kemp signs sweeping voter suppression law. And it is now being shown that the law has had the opposite effect on turnout. And amazingly, even with evidence of a record turnout, you'll double and triple down that the law is suppressing votes. Like you guys always do. Even though the number of people who have been prevented from voting is still at a whopping ZERO. Amazing.
Discounting ballots is voter suppression.
And that's precisely what their new laws will allow. I'd posted that for you many times already.
It's a reading comprehension thing. His condition is related to tripping out his ride.
California is suppressing votes Joe.
California rejected 100,000 mail-in ballots because of mistakes
California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom calls mail-in voting safe and secure, but it's not perfect. More than 100,000 mail-in ballots were rejected by election officials in the state's March presidential primary.
www.pbs.org
And Trump and every Republican here said absentee voting is fraught with fraud and should not be allowed. See, I can be hyperbolic too.
@Joes Place So, Governor Newsom hates democracy, right? I mean, at least way more than Kemp, that is.California is suppressing votes Joe.
California rejected 100,000 mail-in ballots because of mistakes
California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom calls mail-in voting safe and secure, but it's not perfect. More than 100,000 mail-in ballots were rejected by election officials in the state's March presidential primary.
So you're going to do the "what about Trump" thing? Don't do that, my friend. You're better than that. Dems spewed lies about the Georgia law, and the media ran with it.
So . . . your logic seems to be that if we want to IMPROVE turnout we should pass voter suppression laws?
Please, you and @Finance85 need to stop with this sort of dishonest "reasoning." Just because voter suppression laws failed to have as much of the desired outcome as intended, doesn't mean that they weren't intended to be voter suppression laws.
When people are energized by such laws, they may react with more energy and better turnout for a while. But some are still doubtless harmed by such laws, and eventually they can be expected to have the desired outcome.
And Georgia passed a voting reform law immediately after stating they had a secure election just to pacify the Trump wing of the GOP. Florida did the exact same thing.
The law expanded early voting days, and did nothing to suppress the vote.
That's not what I've read. Nor does it fit the rhetoric of the right. Which doesn't mean you are wrong. Just that it would be nice to see some unbiased analysis supporting your contrarian position.
When this has come up in the past, I've thought some of the provisions, even if cutbacks, sounded reasonable enough. Others, not so much.
Look at how long it took for the wingnuts to weigh in. Voter ID psychosis. Year-round voting????
JFC. Voter fraud is another right wing psychedelic trip.
Think:
1. communism
2. socialism
3. antifa
4. woke
5. marxism
6. boogey man in text books
7. evil dude in math books
....yet to be defined stupid reasons to not be a reasonable adult.
The main complaint from the "suppression" side is that it is eliminating some of the things that they did only in 2020 due to the pandemic, which just returns to the way they had it, since all the way back in 2005.
I see nothing in this CBS description that makes the Georgia voting situation any more egregious than any other state out there. And as stated numerous times, New York and Delaware's rules are much more "suppressive". Certainly not enough to switch the All Star Game from it.
What Georgia's new voting law really does — 9 facts
The new law will offer some voters more opportunities for early voting, but it also puts some new restrictions on absentee voting.
www.cbsnews.com
The law does make significant changes to the way the state will run elections moving forward. It expands early voting access for some Georgia voters, adds an ID requirement for absentee voting, codifies the use of drop boxes with strict rules on how they can be used and sets new rules for state and local election officials.
1. Early voting expands in most Georgia counties
2. ID is now required not just for in-person voting, but also for mail-in voting
3. Absentee voting: New rules regulate drop boxes and shorten time frame for requesting and returning mail ballots
4. Food and drink distribution to voters in line by non-poll workers is banned, but "self-service" water stands are allowed
5. Changes to in-person voting are being implemented to address long lines and reduce provisional voting
6. State election board will have new powers and won't be chaired by the secretary of state
7. Results are to be reported faster
8. Voters may call a new hotline with complaints alleging voter intimidation or illegal activity
9. Runoff election period will be five weeks shorter
Slight correction, it massively expands voting access it versus what it was prior to 2020. It's more open than most blue states were prior to 2020.
It keeps many of the exceptions and changes that were made for a pandemic election, and rolls some of them back from pandemic rules slightly. It's far, far more open than it was before the pandemic.
Georgia has faced two consecutive major elections where its been 100% baselessly accused of rigging the election, one from both sides (remember kids, sometimes baselessly insisting an election has been stolen is actually good).
Most of the the partial "rollbacks" were things that were targets of being used to accuse more fake election rigging. So they went from no drop boxes, to 24 hour drop boxes outside, to still having drop boxes, but moved inside for business hours so they couldn't be accused of being unsecured.
Prior to 2020, nobody could drop their vote in a drop box at their convenience. Now, saying that they can drop their ballot, but can't do it at 2am, is the return of Jim Crow.
It was a 100% manufactured bullshit issue for Democrats, one that accomplished absolutely nothing, and here's the funny part...the public didn't give a shit. They wasted several news cycles, squandered a ton of credibility, for an issue that never rose above like the 8th biggest concern to voters. It really set the stage for rep the Democrats/Biden administration has for being out of touch with voters AND not accomplishing anything AND Biden being needlessly partisan divisive.
Well, it did accomplish one thing. When and if Kemp beats Stacy Abrams again, the Democrats will assert that it was stolen by voter supression, despite that there will be more votes cast, and more votes cast by African Americans, and more votes cast outside in-person election day, than any Georgia governor's election in history. So I guess it won't be for nothing.
The main complaint from the "suppression" side is that it is eliminating some of the things that they did only in 2020 due to the pandemic, which just returns to the way they had it, since all the way back in 2005.
I see nothing in this CBS description that makes the Georgia voting situation any more egregious than any other state out there. And as stated numerous times, New York and Delaware's rules are much more "suppressive". Certainly not enough to switch the All Star Game from it.
What Georgia's new voting law really does — 9 facts
The new law will offer some voters more opportunities for early voting, but it also puts some new restrictions on absentee voting.
The law does make significant changes to the way the state will run elections moving forward. It expands early voting access for some Georgia voters, adds an ID requirement for absentee voting, codifies the use of drop boxes with strict rules on how they can be used and sets new rules for state and local election officials.
1. Early voting expands in most Georgia counties
2. ID is now required not just for in-person voting, but also for mail-in voting
3. Absentee voting: New rules regulate drop boxes and shorten time frame for requesting and returning mail ballots
4. Food and drink distribution to voters in line by non-poll workers is banned, but "self-service" water stands are allowed
5. Changes to in-person voting are being implemented to address long lines and reduce provisional voting
6. State election board will have new powers and won't be chaired by the secretary of state
7. Results are to be reported faster
8. Voters may call a new hotline with complaints alleging voter intimidation or illegal activity
9. Runoff election period will be five weeks shorter
6. State election board will have new powers and won't be chaired by the secretary of state
This one seems kinda important don't you say?
This is the richest of all.
The entire premise of the claim that Kemp stole the election from Stacy Abrams is based on the idea that he was the Secretary of State, and was therefore in charge of the election. They demanded that was a crucial conflict of interest.
It was bullshit of course, but the state literally changed the policy to eliminate that VERY complaint. And now addressing their exact concern is even MORE voter suppression.
It's a false issue, and the Democrats are totally in bad faith on the Georgia law. Anything short of letting Stacy Abrams be the only one to see and count the ballots, and then burn them afterward, is voter suppression.
This is a good law that codifies a massive expansion of voting access, and being turned into a Democratic rally point is a really sorry episode in our national politics and went a long way toward the shitpile that is our current politics.
Wouldn't it be unwise to make a conclusion on data that is inconclusive?
Part of the bill was designed to increase in-person early voter turnout, especially in rural areas. Based on the data available it would seem that part of the bill was successful. To determine if votes were suppressed, wouldn't the portions of the bill that would or would not suppress votes have to occur first? The limit of provisional ballots, the long lines, polling places, and voter ID portions that would seemingly negatively impact minorities at a higher rate have not occurred yet, so hard to say whether voters were or were not suppressed.
Celebrating this data as a "win" is the equivalent of spiking the football at the 40 as you are running for a TD. Maybe the bill will not suppress a single vote and all the people upset were wrong, but celebrating this data as a "win" is the equivalent of spiking the football at the 40 as you are running for a TD.
Part of the bill was designed to increase in-person early voter turnout, especially in rural areas. Based on the data available it would seem that part of the bill was successful. To determine if votes were suppressed, wouldn't the portions of the bill that would or would not suppress votes have to occur first? The limit of provisional ballots, the long lines, polling places, and voter ID portions that would seemingly negatively impact minorities at a higher rate have not occurred yet, so hard to say whether voters were or were not suppressed.
Celebrating this data as a "win" is the equivalent of spiking the football at the 40 as you are running for a TD. Maybe the bill will not suppress a single vote and all the people upset were wrong, but celebrating this data as a "win" is the equivalent of spiking the football at the 40 as you are running for a TD.
No. They're not.
I understand that reading the details on stuff ain't your strong suit...
I think the point is....it isn't a voter suppression law.
Thanks.
Looking at 2 of those sites, I see that Biden was partly wrong on one thing - the 5PM closing.
I don't really think Biden being partly wrong on 1 thing means these laws are nothing to worry about.
I don't think "Primaries" are the polls/elections we need to be worried about.
And it's rather odd all the MAGAs on here want to claim they demonstrated "no problems", because it's Rep vs Rep and Dem vs Dem here. Not an actual regular election for political control of their legislatures...
This guy is really something. It doesn’t matter how many times he gets his ass handed to him here, he still just asserts that he is just smarter than everyone else and claims victory.
Side thought....
There are lots of poor and older Rs who could be adversely affected by these laws, too. I wonder how that might impact the R turnout in R primaries? Would the crazy candidates be more likely to benefit or their more mainstream R competitors?
It's unsettling to watch Georgia. Kemp is awful. And the best the GOP could do for within-party competition is someone who seems even worse.
Almost makes me feel sorry for Georgia Rs. The state GOP is so sure that they will goose-step to their tune, that they don't need to give them decent choices.
Last edited:
But they won't be.
Remember who this law puts in charge of COUNTING those votes. It's not an "impartial" group, anymore.
When people understand he’s not looking to be right, he’s an old fart who just likes to argue, he might get ignored by EVERYONE.
Nobody is saying it's a return to Jim Crow. Which is not to say that worries about the return of Jim Crow are inappropriate.
Drop boxes addressed a couple of voting problems. A big one was that it could be hard for some working folks to vote because they had few (if any) hours outside of work when they could vote.
If you have drop boxes, but then impose the same access restrictions on using them that created the problem in the first place, that's not an improvement.
