Parsing Through Dis/Misinformation About Georgia's New Voting Laws

[okclem]

For anyone interested, here's a very basic primer on what the new laws mean. The last item covered is the most concerning, by a long shot, and it's the one you won't hear Republicans talking about. They want this to be all about voter IDs because it's the most easily defensible position. But the ID thing is really a red herring in terms of the potential for suppression contained in this legislation.

Breaking down claims about Georgia's election law: What's true and what's not?

Politicians on both sides of the political aisle have misrepresented parts of Georgia's new election law. Here's a breakdown of what's accurate and what's not.

abcnews.go.com

 

[PawsFan_]

Good article.

 

[scotchtiger]

For anyone interested, here's a very basic primer on what the new laws mean. The last item covered is the most concerning, by a long shot, and it's the one you won't hear Republicans talking about. They want this to be all about voter IDs because it's the most easily defensible position. But the ID thing is really a red herring in terms of the potential for suppression contained in this legislation.

Breaking down claims about Georgia's election law: What's true and what's not?

Politicians on both sides of the political aisle have misrepresented parts of Georgia's new election law. Here's a breakdown of what's accurate and what's not.

abcnews.go.com

I mean I get why you want to shift the focus after calling the Voter ID provisions and food and drink provisions racist, Jim Crow and violations of civil rights. This article, even slanted left, largely debunks those things.

The last provision does seem the most suspect to me. The other provisions are completely logical. Voter ID is even somewhat of a misnomer, because an absentee voter can simply provide their DOB and SSN. Zero documents.

 

[nytigerfan]

For anyone interested, here's a very basic primer on what the new laws mean. The last item covered is the most concerning, by a long shot, and it's the one you won't hear Republicans talking about. They want this to be all about voter IDs because it's the most easily defensible position. But the ID thing is really a red herring in terms of the potential for suppression contained in this legislation.

Breaking down claims about Georgia's election law: What's true and what's not?

Politicians on both sides of the political aisle have misrepresented parts of Georgia's new election law. Here's a breakdown of what's accurate and what's not.

abcnews.go.com

Been saying this all along. All the other crap is classic misdirection from the big one. The republicans can now simply overturn any election that they lose in georgia. That is essentially what trump asked the GA SOS to do the last time around.

 

[okclem]

I mean I get why you want to shift the focus after calling the Voter ID provisions and food and drink provisions racist, Jim Crow and violations of civil rights. This article, even slanted left, largely debunks those things.

The last provision does seem the most suspect to me. The other provisions are completely logical. Voter ID is even somewhat of a misnomer, because an absentee voter can simply provide their DOB and SSN. Zero documents.

If the worst aspect of a person is their tendency to murder people, it doesn't really matter if that person also donates canned goods to the local food drive. That's a clumsy analogy, but that last provision easily undoes whatever good the republicans are trying to spin out of this. It's obviously politically motivated out of bad faith arguments and lies that the 2020 elections were massively corrupt and fraudulent. Every court in the land has rejected the election fraud lies.

The republicans in Georgia just realized they can't keep winning elections without changing the rules to suppress votes.

 

[okclem]

Been saying this all along. All the other crap is classic misdirection from the big one. The republicans can now simply overturn any election that they lose in georgia. That is essentially what trump asked the GA SOS to do the last time around.

Well you were on it. Set aside the racial aspect of all this...this legislation is entirely anti-democratic. Anyone who supports this legislation cannot be taken seriously when it comes to democracy.

 

[scotchtiger]

If the worst aspect of a person is their tendency to murder people, it doesn't really matter if that person also donates canned goods to the local food drive. That's a clumsy analogy, but that last provision easily undoes whatever good the republicans are trying to spin out of this. It's obviously politically motivated out of bad faith arguments and lies that the 2020 elections were massively corrupt and fraudulent. Every court in the land has rejected the election fraud lies.

The republicans in Georgia just realized they can't keep winning elections without changing the rules to suppress votes.

 

[asnelli]

If the worst aspect of a person is their tendency to murder people, it doesn't really matter if that person also donates canned goods to the local food drive. That's a clumsy analogy, but that last provision easily undoes whatever good the republicans are trying to spin out of this. It's obviously politically motivated out of bad faith arguments and lies that the 2020 elections were massively corrupt and fraudulent. Every court in the land has rejected the election fraud lies.

The republicans in Georgia just realized they can't keep winning elections without changing the rules to suppress votes.

I’m genuinely curious where the voter suppression is in this law. I can get on board with making arguments for or against improving some of these new provisions but when you compare them to the prior voting laws in GA it seems there’s more opportunities to vote in person and a little less time to cast an absentee ballot. Having some form of identification seems common sense to me as does not allowing some random Trump or Biden supporter handing out sandwiches and asking for votes. I’ve tried but I can’t find the Jim Crow rhetoric that keeps being put out there. And I think that rhetoric is the reason why MLB pulled out of Atlanta. Moving the all star game will have more of a negative impact on minorities than anything in the new law.

I would like to know more about the changes to the election board. From my understanding the Democrats have at least one nomination on the board. And I read the new law as the board being able to make changes to districts that are having major issues. I’ve heard other people say that republicans can now over turn election results but haven’t seen an explanation as to what in the law states that and how that would work.

Clearly people are upset and I’ve tried to do the research but I guess I’m just missing something. I also now know more about GA voting laws than I do about my own state!

 

[wmnesbitt]

Something changed by republicans so it is racist, homophobic, bigotry, etc.

Something changed by democrats and it is woke.

I dont recall things being this divided before Obama was president. But maybe I just didnt pay attention then. I really just want the Clinton and Obama tree of leaders to go away. It seems the Bushs are finally gone.

The link from Bill to Hilary to Obama to Hiliary to Biden is too much connection.

 

[iceheart08]

Something changed by republicans so it is racist, homophobic, bigotry, etc.

Something changed by democrats and it is woke.

I dont recall things being this divided before Obama was president. But maybe I just didnt pay attention then. I really just want the Clinton and Obama tree of leaders to go away. It seems the Bushs are finally gone.

The link from Bill to Hilary to Obama to Hiliary to Biden is too much connection.

The difference from obama's first term to now is the prevalence and dominance of social media as our main outlet for news and connection.

 

[scotchtiger]

The difference from obama's first term to now is the prevalence and dominance of social media as our main outlet for news and connection.

Social media and 24 hour news are just horribly toxic to our political atmosphere.

 

[nytigerfan]

I’m genuinely curious where the voter suppression is in this law. I can get on board with making arguments for or against improving some of these new provisions but when you compare them to the prior voting laws in GA it seems there’s more opportunities to vote in person and a little less time to cast an absentee ballot. Having some form of identification seems common sense to me as does not allowing some random Trump or Biden supporter handing out sandwiches and asking for votes. I’ve tried but I can’t find the Jim Crow rhetoric that keeps being put out there. And I think that rhetoric is the reason why MLB pulled out of Atlanta. Moving the all star game will have more of a negative impact on minorities than anything in the new law.

I would like to know more about the changes to the election board. From my understanding the Democrats have at least one nomination on the board. And I read the new law as the board being able to make changes to districts that are having major issues. I’ve heard other people say that republicans can now over turn election results but haven’t seen an explanation as to what in the law states that and how that would work.

Clearly people are upset and I’ve tried to do the research but I guess I’m just missing something. I also now know more about GA voting laws than I do about my own state!

You answered your own question with this sentence: "And I read the new law as the board being able to make changes to districts that are having major issues."

How will they uncover or define "major issues"? We just went through an election where republicans claimed - without evidence - that there was widespread fraud and Trump had a landslide victory stolen from him. This was despite the fact that 1) trump trailed in every pre-election poll, and 2) three months prior to the election the NY times reported that Trump's plan plan was to claim victory the night of the election and then claim fraud as the mail in votes were then tabulated. Most republicans fell for it hook, line and sinker. Even the ones who were smart enough to know is was bullshit didnt care b/c they just wanted their guy to win.

So the next election, that is all it takes. The republicans can claim fraud - with no evidence - and then appoint some mouth breather from Dalton GA to oversee the election in fulton county. Then they can do whatever they want. Remember the recording of the call between Trump and the GA SOS? Trump tried to strong arm him into
"finding votes" for him to win. The next time it won't be the SOS taking that call, it will whomever has been "appointed" by the republicans. At that point we no longer have a democracy.

 

[wmnesbitt]

The difference from obama's first term to now is the prevalence and dominance of social media as our main outlet for news and connection.

excellent point. And I would add the continued disparity in the social media platforms policing of the content between conservative and liberal. Or mostly the applying of their policing efforts to a majority of conservative voices but not to the liberal side.

 

[AugTig]

You answered your own question with this sentence: "And I read the new law as the board being able to make changes to districts that are having major issues."

How will they uncover or define "major issues"? We just went through an election where republicans claimed - without evidence - that there was widespread fraud and Trump had a landslide victory stolen from him. This was despite the fact that 1) trump trailed in every pre-election poll, and 2) three months prior to the election the NY times reported that Trump's plan plan was to claim victory the night of the election and then claim fraud as the mail in votes were then tabulated. Most republicans fell for it hook, line and sinker. Even the ones who were smart enough to know is was bullshit didnt care b/c they just wanted their guy to win.

So the next election, that is all it takes. The republicans can claim fraud - with no evidence - and then appoint some mouth breather from Dalton GA to oversee the election in fulton county. Then they can do whatever they want. Remember the recording of the call between Trump and the GA SOS? Trump tried to strong arm him into
"finding votes" for him to win. The next time it won't be the SOS taking that call, it will whomever has been "appointed" by the republicans. At that point we no longer have a democracy.

🤣

 

[asnelli]

You answered your own question with this sentence: "And I read the new law as the board being able to make changes to districts that are having major issues."

How will they uncover or define "major issues"? We just went through an election where republicans claimed - without evidence - that there was widespread fraud and Trump had a landslide victory stolen from him. This was despite the fact that 1) trump trailed in every pre-election poll, and 2) three months prior to the election the NY times reported that Trump's plan plan was to claim victory the night of the election and then claim fraud as the mail in votes were then tabulated. Most republicans fell for it hook, line and sinker. Even the ones who were smart enough to know is was bullshit didnt care b/c they just wanted their guy to win.

So the next election, that is all it takes. The republicans can claim fraud - with no evidence - and then appoint some mouth breather from Dalton GA to oversee the election in fulton county. Then they can do whatever they want. Remember the recording of the call between Trump and the GA SOS? Trump tried to strong arm him into
"finding votes" for him to win. The next time it won't be the SOS taking that call, it will whomever has been "appointed" by the republicans. At that point we no longer have a democracy.

I appreciate the response and the dialogue but I’m not completely sure what you’re trying to say. I don’t like Donald Trump either but none of what you said answered my question. I don’t see anything in the law that gives the board that much power to overthrow election results. And there’s going to be a Democrat on the board so I’d assume they’ll be able to call out anything they see as wrong.

Are you against that particular part of the voting law because it’s republicans in charge or because of the way the law is written. To me it reads as “if you’re screwing up and unorganized we’ll step in”.

Trump went way too far on the election fraud conspiracy but Hillary and Abrams challenged the process when they lost as well. So if both sides are claiming fraud in various elections wouldn’t it make sense to tighten things up a little?

I would also be curious on your thoughts regarding Kentucky. They’re getting praise from Democrats about their new voter laws but even with the changes they’re still way more restrictive than GA. So why is GA getting all the heat?

 

[statepawdog]

Something changed by republicans so it is racist, homophobic, bigotry, etc.

Something changed by democrats and it is woke.

I dont recall things being this divided before Obama was president. But maybe I just didnt pay attention then. I really just want the Clinton and Obama tree of leaders to go away. It seems the Bushs are finally gone.

The link from Bill to Hilary to Obama to Hiliary to Biden is too much connection.

If you are honest, Republicans have been oppressing blacks since Reconstruction. This voting law is just another way to oppress blacks..

 

[dpic73]

excellent point. And I would add the continued disparity in the social media platforms policing of the content between conservative and liberal. Or mostly the applying of their policing efforts to disinformation but not to the liberal side.

Fixed it for you

 

[asnelli]

If you are honest, Republicans have been oppressing blacks since Reconstruction. This voting law is just another way to oppress blacks..

Actually the Democratic party was considered the “racist” party until the 1960’s. Things switched around that time and Republicans became “racists”. I don’t know much about history but the Democrats were definitely responsible for some bad stuff during/after reconstruction.

 

[scotchtiger]

If you are honest, Republicans have been oppressing blacks since Reconstruction. This voting law is just another way to oppress blacks..

Do you still think it’s illegal to drink water in a voting line in GA? Because you’ve said it twice. Still can’t tell if you’re trolling or “simple.”

 

[statepawdog]

I do believe that was the intent until the Republicans received the backlash.

 

[CUT93]

I do believe that was the intent until the Republicans received the backlash.

Either you are truly simple minded or are just another example of racists ruining this country.
The law/legislation passed has not been changed. It is the same now as it was before whatever "backlash" you are referring to. People either were or were not going to be allowed to have water in line. Just in case you still have not figured it out- water was allowed before the backlash and it is allowed after the backlash. It always was allowed, it was never not allowed.

 

[scotchtiger]

I do believe that was the intent until the Republicans received the backlash.

Hahahahahahaha

Oh man. I was hoping you were trolling.

This is really amazing. So you actually think that the bill would have kept a black person from drinking a bottle of water in line. I’m honestly mystified that thought process could have occurred. Perhaps my favorite part is you repeated this even after I showed you the language allowing for self service water stations.

And you think this only changed because of backlash... Did republicans go back and alter the bill somehow? Did they materially change the language after it was signed into law? Did they add the water station piece after the backlash, maybe in pencil in the margin or something?

Sorry for getting in a deep belly laugh at your expense. But this is honestly amazing to me. It also helps me realize the astounding lack of basic comprehension that exists among voters.

 

[CUT93]

You answered your own question with this sentence: "And I read the new law as the board being able to make changes to districts that are having major issues."

How will they uncover or define "major issues"? We just went through an election where republicans claimed - without evidence - that there was widespread fraud and Trump had a landslide victory stolen from him. This was despite the fact that 1) trump trailed in every pre-election poll, and 2) three months prior to the election the NY times reported that Trump's plan plan was to claim victory the night of the election and then claim fraud as the mail in votes were then tabulated. Most republicans fell for it hook, line and sinker. Even the ones who were smart enough to know is was bullshit didnt care b/c they just wanted their guy to win.

So the next election, that is all it takes. The republicans can claim fraud - with no evidence - and then appoint some mouth breather from Dalton GA to oversee the election in fulton county. Then they can do whatever they want. Remember the recording of the call between Trump and the GA SOS? Trump tried to strong arm him into
"finding votes" for him to win. The next time it won't be the SOS taking that call, it will whomever has been "appointed" by the republicans. At that point we no longer have a democracy.

Can you please point me to the section of the law that says this person can unilaterally throw out election results? I'll hang up and listen.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Arizona Rep. Mark Finchem on Voting Laws and Voter IDs: "Can Ya’ Just Show Me the Evidence?" | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft

Guest post by Arizona Rep. Mark Finchem Did you know that you must present a photo identification to get your COVID vaccine shots, buy cigarettes, alcoholic beverages, cold medicines, fly on airplanes, drive cars, open bank accounts, lease apartments, get mortgages, get hotel rooms, buy a can...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[jakefest]

I appreciate the response and the dialogue but I’m not completely sure what you’re trying to say. I don’t like Donald Trump either but none of what you said answered my question. I don’t see anything in the law that gives the board that much power to overthrow election results. And there’s going to be a Democrat on the board so I’d assume they’ll be able to call out anything they see as wrong.

Are you against that particular part of the voting law because it’s republicans in charge or because of the way the law is written. To me it reads as “if you’re screwing up and unorganized we’ll step in”.

Trump went way too far on the election fraud conspiracy but Hillary and Abrams challenged the process when they lost as well. So if both sides are claiming fraud in various elections wouldn’t it make sense to tighten things up a little?

I would also be curious on your thoughts regarding Kentucky. They’re getting praise from Democrats about their new voter laws but even with the changes they’re still way more restrictive than GA. So why is GA getting all the heat?

Well said

 

[nytigerfan]

I appreciate the response and the dialogue but I’m not completely sure what you’re trying to say. I don’t like Donald Trump either but none of what you said answered my question. I don’t see anything in the law that gives the board that much power to overthrow election results. And there’s going to be a Democrat on the board so I’d assume they’ll be able to call out anything they see as wrong.

Are you against that particular part of the voting law because it’s republicans in charge or because of the way the law is written. To me it reads as “if you’re screwing up and unorganized we’ll step in”.

Trump went way too far on the election fraud conspiracy but Hillary and Abrams challenged the process when they lost as well. So if both sides are claiming fraud in various elections wouldn’t it make sense to tighten things up a little?

I would also be curious on your thoughts regarding Kentucky. They’re getting praise from Democrats about their new voter laws but even with the changes they’re still way more restrictive than GA. So why is GA getting all the heat?

No man, there is no comparison. Hilary and Abrams both conceded their elections in a timely fashion. Trump still has not. He is still claiming that his “sacred landslide victory” was stolen from him through WIDESPREAD fraud. The same people who backed him up on that big lie have now put themselves in charge of the elections in Ga.

So let’s fast forward to the 2022 election. Let’s say a Democrat wins the senate seat. The pubs can approach Fulton county and say “these voters look suspicious to us, we want them purged and their vote should not count”. The Fulton county election board can refuse, then the pubs can say “OK you are al fired and we are appointing our own people.” Now given, they cannot do it in time to overturn the 2022 election, but they can put their own people in place to oversee the 2024 elections in the four biggest democrat voting counties. Then they have the power to erase as many Democrat voted as they want to in 2024.

So to recap, the same people who claimed fraud without evidence in 2020 can now do it again and use it as a power grab to control elections.

 

[jakefest]

No man, there is no comparison. Hilary and Abrams both conceded their elections in a timely fashion. Trump still has not. He is still claiming that his “sacred landslide victory” was stolen from him through WIDESPREAD fraud. The same people who backed him up on that big lie have now put themselves in charge of the elections in Ga.

So let’s fast forward to the 2022 election. Let’s say a Democrat wins the senate seat. The pubs can approach Fulton county and say “these voters look suspicious to us, we want them purged and their vote should not count”. The Fulton county election board can refuse, then the pubs can say “OK you are al fired and we are appointing our own people.” Now given, they cannot do it in time to overturn the 2022 election, but they can put their own people in place to oversee the 2024 elections in the four biggest democrat voting counties. Then they have the power to erase as many Democrat voted as they want to in 2024.

So to recap, the same people who claimed fraud without evidence in 2020 can now do it again and use it as a power grab to control elections.

Breaking Stacey Abrams Funded Group That Pushed Voting Machine Disinformation In Georgia | Elections

Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’

Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear."There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level," Clinton said during an interview...

www.yahoo.com

Just because they conceded doesn’t mean either haven’t had influence whether real or bogus regarding voter fraud nor have either ever stopped telling the world they were cheated out of the election. What’s the fundamental difference?

What would be more genuine would be to admit that both sides are dirty and full of sh*t.

 

[nytigerfan]

Breaking Stacey Abrams Funded Group That Pushed Voting Machine Disinformation In Georgia | Elections

Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’

Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear."There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level," Clinton said during an interview...

www.yahoo.com

Just because they conceded doesn’t mean either haven’t had influence whether real or bogus regarding voter fraud nor have either ever stopped telling the world they were cheated out of the election. What’s the fundamental difference?

What would be more genuine would be to admit that both sides are dirty and full of sh*t.

I’ll concede Stacy Abrams because I don’t know enough about her election and I am on vacation and don’t feel like reading the article. But there is no comparison with Hilary and Trump. Hilary griping in interviews is way different than trump holding stop the steal rallies that lead to policemen in the capitol getting beaten and sprayed with bear spray. Not even in the same neighborhood.

 

[asnelli]

No man, there is no comparison. Hilary and Abrams both conceded their elections in a timely fashion. Trump still has not. He is still claiming that his “sacred landslide victory” was stolen from him through WIDESPREAD fraud. The same people who backed him up on that big lie have now put themselves in charge of the elections in Ga.

So let’s fast forward to the 2022 election. Let’s say a Democrat wins the senate seat. The pubs can approach Fulton county and say “these voters look suspicious to us, we want them purged and their vote should not count”. The Fulton county election board can refuse, then the pubs can say “OK you are al fired and we are appointing our own people.” Now given, they cannot do it in time to overturn the 2022 election, but they can put their own people in place to oversee the 2024 elections in the four biggest democrat voting counties. Then they have the power to erase as many Democrat voted as they want to in 2024.

So to recap, the same people who claimed fraud without evidence in 2020 can now do it again and use it as a power grab to control elections.

Abrams lost by 50k votes and has never conceded to this day. But the point I’m making is we have multiple elections with both sides claiming some type of fraud. We can all agree Trump’s claims are more severe in nature but regardless of how severe the claims are they all erode voter confidence. And there’s not much proof from any of the 3 that fraud actually happened.
So if we have these accusations from both sides which have eroded voter confidence then why wouldn’t we try to put some parameters in place to help curb that erosion of confidence?

I think we can all agree that while there’s not been proven to be mail in ballot fraud in GA that mail in ballots lend the easiest route for cheating/fraud. We just had it happen in the NC Senate race in 2018 and they had to throw out the entire election results and start over. Simply requiring the same identification through mail in ballots as we do with in person voting seems like a very reasonable ask to me.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on the example of overturning the elections that you provided. I don’t interpret the law to allow the board to blatantly take over a voting district and overturn the results because they don’t like the outcome. But that’s just my opinion. And Fulton is a very poorly run district that does itself no favors with their leadership but that’s another discussion to have.
Have a great evening and Go Tigers

 

[statepawdog]

Trump lost the popular vote to Clinton in 2016 by three million votes. He knew he would have an uphill battle in 2020 and he started the "fraud" claim way before 2020. He lost the election by eight miilion votes. No way that nuch fraud can occur. Besides most decent and honest people despise Trump.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Trump lost the popular vote to Clinton in 2016 by three million votes. He knew he would have an uphill battle in 2020 and he started the "fraud" claim way before 2020. He lost the election by eight miilion votes. No way that nuch fraud can occur. Besides most decent and honest people despise Trump.

Ok...so you are chalking up most of the 74 million votes for Trump as not decent and dishonest people?

 

[statepawdog]

Ok...so you are chalking up most of the 74 million votes for Trump as not decent and dishonest people?

Have you taken a good look at the scumbags at the capital that started the riot?

 

[scotchtiger]

Have you taken a good look at the scumbags at the capital that started the riot?

My word. I didn’t think my opinion of you could decline any further, but you keep on digging.

That is a statistically worse analogy than me saying all 80 million Biden voters are scumbags like the looters, rioters and killers that graced our airways last summer.

I continue to be astonished at the examples of low intellect among our electorate and even worse, our fanbase.

 

[iceheart08]

excellent point. And I would add the continued disparity in the social media platforms policing of the content between conservative and liberal. Or mostly the applying of their policing efforts to a majority of conservative voices but not to the liberal side.

I'm just glad someone is finally admitting that patriot front, q anon, and the other associated alt-right racist groups that were banned for spreading misinformation do in fact form the base of the "conservative" movement.

 

[wmnesbitt]

I'm just glad someone is finally admitting that patriot front, q anon, and the other associated alt-right racist groups that were banned for spreading misinformation do in fact form the base of the "conservative" movement.

Woke = Racist. Prove me wrong.

 

[tigrbybirth]

Something changed by republicans so it is racist, homophobic, bigotry, etc.

Something changed by democrats and it is woke.

I dont recall things being this divided before Obama was president. But maybe I just didnt pay attention then. I really just want the Clinton and Obama tree of leaders to go away. It seems the Bushs are finally gone.

The link from Bill to Hilary to Obama to Hiliary to Biden is too much connection.

First, I'm a moderate Republican, former Bush volunteer. One of the trends is not being able to see any shades in the other side, i.e., Republicans not being able to tell the policy difference between AOC and Joe Cunningham or Amy Klobuchar. It's like Democrats thinking that think that Joe Kennedy and Susan Collins are in lock step. Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama were on opposite ends of the Democratic party. Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton were constantly butting heads, but most Republicans were unable to see that.

Realistically, taking Clinton's moderate approach likely had a great deal to do with the economic recovery we saw under his administration. He was business friendly and a capitalist. He worked on welfare reform. Personally, I think he could have done more on racial and environmental issues, but he didn't want to rock the boat. What Obama brought to the table was honesty. White America had not heard honesty from a black politician, perhaps ever and that honesty probably made race relations worse for whites. We thought we were doing far better than we actually were.

 

[tigrbybirth]

Ok...so you are chalking up most of the 74 million votes for Trump as not decent and dishonest people?

The last election was a resounding defeat for Trump and extreme liberalism. There was a core group who supported Trump, but far from 74M, probably in the 20-30M range. There was a smaller core who voted for Biden because they thought he was the leader we needed. The Republican message, "be scared of the far left socialists" was very effective. I agree with the concern, by the way. Most American thought that Trump was too great a price for protection against the Sanders branch.

 

[tigrbybirth]

Abrams lost by 50k votes and has never conceded to this day. But the point I’m making is we have multiple elections with both sides claiming some type of fraud. We can all agree Trump’s claims are more severe in nature but regardless of how severe the claims are they all erode voter confidence. And there’s not much proof from any of the 3 that fraud actually happened.
So if we have these accusations from both sides which have eroded voter confidence then why wouldn’t we try to put some parameters in place to help curb that erosion of confidence?

I think we can all agree that while there’s not been proven to be mail in ballot fraud in GA that mail in ballots lend the easiest route for cheating/fraud. We just had it happen in the NC Senate race in 2018 and they had to throw out the entire election results and start over. Simply requiring the same identification through mail in ballots as we do with in person voting seems like a very reasonable ask to me.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on the example of overturning the elections that you provided. I don’t interpret the law to allow the board to blatantly take over a voting district and overturn the results because they don’t like the outcome. But that’s just my opinion. And Fulton is a very poorly run district that does itself no favors with their leadership but that’s another discussion to have.
Have a great evening and Go Tigers

It took her a couple of weeks, but she did concede.

 

[dpic73]

Something changed by republicans so it is racist, homophobic, bigotry, etc.

Something changed by democrats and it is woke.

I dont recall things being this divided before Obama was president. But maybe I just didnt pay attention then. I really just want the Clinton and Obama tree of leaders to go away. It seems the Bushs are finally gone.

The link from Bill to Hilary to Obama to Hiliary to Biden is too much connection.

I think the disconnect came from the way Kemp sold the bill. He suggested that it was in response to a lack of voter confidence in the results, when instead he should have sold it as a hedge against future election meddling by the likes of Trump. When the bill is read honestly, it's not nearly as bad as the way it was "marketed", though parts of it stunk. The part about the election commission was clearly an attempt at throwing a bone to the MAGA wingdings. Other than that, it's biggest problem was the messaging.

 

[clemsontiger02]

The last election was a resounding defeat for Trump and extreme liberalism.

So well said.