In B4 LG starts the DOJ brings suit VS Georgia thread.

#52
#52
OrangeTsar said:
Biden administration can’t pass HR1 through constitutional means (legislatively through the Congress), so they immediately do what they always do, try to short circuit democracy through the Courts. Same weasel plan they always fall back on. Predicable and pathetic
Click to expand...


Where is that irony gif when I need it?
 
#55
#55
RockyTop85 said:
It doesn’t say you can’t try to “cheaply bribe” someone with food or water. It says you can’t give an elector (voter) food or water.

I didn’t say it was racist.
Click to expand...
I know you didn’t …the cheaply bribe comment goes back to campaign workers handing out water …. The law is written to limit the butt kissing
 
#56
#56
hog88 said:
It’s complete theater. If GA had just reverted to the pre-pandemic voting process it would be harder to vote than it is with the changes this law brings.
Click to expand...
And Coca Cola, Delta Airlines, and MLB all shot themselves in the foot over it in a totally unforced error. I haven’t bought a Coke, flown delta, or watched an MLB game since and I am not alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolinWayne, StarRaider and dovervolz
#57
#57
VolStrom said:
Where is the irony in trying to pass a bill that they don't even have the constitutional right to enforce?
Click to expand...


It was the post about the Dems using the courts to end around things when the GOP has filed 87,000 cases about fake voter fraud and 3 million cases against the ACA.
 
#58
#58
VolStrom said:
Is it just me or is the democratic party assuming that every American is just stupid?
Click to expand...
No, but they do think that most Americans are like the people found in the Coastal metropolitan areas. They honestly think we all share their obsession with race, social justice, the evils of capitalism, and the backwardness or religion (especially Christianity). They honestly and pitifully think we are like them.
 
#59
#59
I am concerned by the provision in the law that allows the state election board to remove and replace county election board overseers with hand picked replacements. That part makes little sense to me.

I also hope that the state uses the last presidential election as a barometer for future turnout and increases the number of voting machines in high traffic precincts.

If you're really concerned with someone not having an ID to vote, volunteer to take them to get one. Transportation issues on voting day? Plan to carpool for those who can't drive and didn't request an absentee ballot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill and Orangeslice13
#60
#60
AshG said:
I am concerned by the provision in the law that allows the state election board to remove and replace county election board overseers with hand picked replacements. That part makes little sense to me.

I also hope that the state uses the last presidential election as a barometer for future turnout and increases the number of voting machines in high traffic precincts.

If you're really concerned with someone not having an ID to vote, volunteer to take them to get one. Transportation issues on voting day? Plan to carpool for those who can't drive and didn't request an absentee ballot.
Click to expand...
It’s not difficult is it.
I would not worry about your concerns. In the last election several states just disregarded their own rules so it’s not like this is set in stone
 
#61
#61
Carl Pickens said:
I know you didn’t …the cheaply bribe comment goes back to campaign workers handing out water …. The law is written to limit the butt kissing
Click to expand...
It’s written to limit handing out of gifts, including but not limited to food and drink, by anyone.
 
#62
#62
VolStrom said:
I just read it and I'm still confused as to what is in the Georgia law that affects black people that doesn't affect white people. Please point that out since this will be argued in possibly up to the supreme court assuming the doj filed this in the 9th circuit?
Click to expand...

I have no idea. Proving that the law has a discriminatory effect is pretty fact specific. I don’t know enough facts to say whether it is or it isn’t.
 
#63
#63
AshG said:
I am concerned by the provision in the law that allows the state election board to remove and replace county election board overseers with hand picked replacements. That part makes little sense to me.

I also hope that the state uses the last presidential election as a barometer for future turnout and increases the number of voting machines in high traffic precincts.

If you're really concerned with someone not having an ID to vote, volunteer to take them to get one. Transportation issues on voting day? Plan to carpool for those who can't drive and didn't request an absentee ballot.
Click to expand...
The reason for the state overriding county was because a lot of R county seats were refusing to follow state laws back even in 2016 or earlier. That led to claims of the Rs doing shady stuff. At the time there was zero the state could do to punish these county level people. Especially right before an election.

Now they can.

And if you are wondering why the Rs are punishing Rs. It's because Kemp, now our governor, was the state election guy powerless to fix previous issues before.

Which the Ds used that fact to attack him during his run for governor.

I know everyone thinks this law is bad because an R came up with it. But really it was a bunch of changes everyone wanted. Right up until the Rs actually made them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13 and AshG
#65
#65
Orangeslice13 said:
So……butt kissing
Click to expand...
No, clearly not, or the first clause of that paragraph renders the food/water clause unnecessary.

Also, I think people who can’t conceive of any other reason for doing that are telling on themselves in a way that far outweighs the value of the rebuttal.

In Georgia, a few cycles ago, there were people complaining about waiting hours in line. So trying to make that process more bearable is a viable form of charity or activism and can be accomplished without influencing voter choice.

If influencing voter choice while they’re in line is the conduct that Georgia wanted to prohibit then that can be done with other language… that’s already in the statute.
 
#66
#66
I'm curious to what kind of person would be so undecided on who to vote for while standing on line at the poll that a bottle of water would be the deciding factor. I'm, sure that the "Warnock water" was the deciding factor in Rev. Warnocks victory.

On the other hand - I think if I were trying to discourage voting, I'd limit the number of polling sites, limit the time it was open and do what I could to make it as uncomfortable as possible to be there. And I'd target specific communities that may have a propensity to vote against my preferred side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohhbother
#67
#67
RockyTop85 said:
In Georgia, a few cycles ago, there were people complaining about waiting hours in line. So trying to make that process more bearable is a viable form of charity or activism and can be accomplished without influencing voter choice.
Click to expand...


This law is a reaction to violating those previous standards, so apparently we can’t engage in “activism” without attempting to influence voters at the poles.
If there wasn’t a problem with people using water to campaign in the past then we would not be discussing it now
 
Last edited:
#68
#68
Septic said:
I'm curious to what kind of person would be so undecided on who to vote for while standing on line at the poll that a bottle of water would be the deciding factor. I'm, sure that the "Warnock water" was the deciding factor in Rev. Warnocks victory.

On the other hand - I think if I were trying to discourage voting, I'd limit the number of polling sites, limit the time it was open and do what I could to make it as uncomfortable as possible to be there. And I'd target specific communities that may have a propensity to vote against my preferred side.
Click to expand...

A) is irrelevant. It’s a violation of the law that’s now getting clarification
B) spend your energy correcting that problem ( longer hours…more locations) instead of creating new problems.
 
#69
#69
Orangeslice13 said:
This law is a reaction to violating those previous standards, so apparently we can’t engage in “activism” without attempting to influence voters at the poles.
If there wasn’t a problem with people using water to campaign in the past then we would not be discussing it now
Click to expand...
“Already in the statute” meaning it’s higher up in the paragraph, not previously existing. My bad. I have no idea if it was already illegal. If it was, how is making it illegal for a different reason going to fix the problem*?

Also, are you saying that there’s no need to pass laws that are narrowly tailored to their purpose; any law is prudent as long as it addresses a perceived problem? If the state legislature says “well, we’re having a lot of DUI and that is a problem, so we are going to make all forms of driving illegal,” would you be good with that? If so, I don’t agree. If not, how is that different?

Finally, was it really a problem? That determination seems to be fully a derivative of the “stolen election” narrative and the Georgia legislature’s need to pass something to reassure all the people disaffected by Trump Co claiming they had evidence that the election was stolen from them.
 
#70
#70
RockyTop85 said:
“Already in the statute” meaning it’s higher up in the paragraph, not previously existing. My bad. I have no idea if it was already illegal. If it was, how is making it illegal for a different reason going to fix the problem*?

Also, are you saying that there’s no need to pass laws that are narrowly tailored to their purpose; any law is prudent as long as it addresses a perceived problem? If the state legislature says “well, we’re having a lot of DUI and that is a problem, so we are going to make all forms of driving illegal,” would you be good with that? If so, I don’t agree. If not, how is that different?

Finally, was it really a problem? That determination seems to be fully a derivative of the “stolen election” narrative and the Georgia legislature’s need to pass something to reassure all the people disaffected by Trump Co claiming they had evidence that the election was stolen from them.
Click to expand...
I’d have been fine with arresting and jailing those that broke the law instead of this “redefining” that actually increases voter rights in Ga.
 
#74
#74
RockyTop85 said:
To prevent private groups from counteracting legislative and administrative efforts to make voting as miserable as possible for members of the other political party.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t that be for “both” parties? Are you saying the law is racist and discriminatory?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top