Abrams mulls asking a court to order a second vote in Georgia governor’s race

[Individual]

Obviously no one likes to lose an election.
Get over it.
Every voting age, legal primary resident citizen, of the Nation, State, local district, where elections take place should be identified and allowed to cast their vote with no regard of differences in race, age, gender, etc. where they are a constituent of the candidates they are choosing from.

 

[maxparrish]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ories_abramselection-1120a:homepage/story-ans




I think she will. Then off to the Courts.
She must show that enough voters were illegally disenfranchised of their lawful right to vote
Presently that would entail approx 18 K voters denied their right to vote

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/us/politics/georgia-abrams-kemp-voting.html

Nothing like mangled stories circulated to inflame the volatiles. I'm sorry, however you characterize it, Abrams came closer than she had any right to expect.



If there was anyone being suppressed it sure ain't Abrams.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Obviously no one likes to lose an election.
Get over it.

Quite right.

Every voting age, legal primary resident citizen, of the Nation, State, local district, where elections take place should be identified and allowed to cast their vote with no regard of differences in race, age, gender, etc. where they are a constituent of the candidates they are choosing from.

They should, but I have a question.

IF the electoral regulations are controlled by "Party A" and "Party A" knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that a large number of the supporters for "Party B" did not prove "Qualification X" (let's call it "a street address" [even though they have lived in houses with known locations for most of their lives and are acknowledged to be "citizens"]), THEN would you consider that it would qualify as "voter suppression" to require potential voters to prove "Qualification X" in order to vote?

 

[WCH]

Do you have any idea how elections work?

Hundreds of thousands of ballots come in late all the time, changing the vote totals days after the election, and typically they are Democratic votes in urban counties. We just never talk about it because it's usually not a factor at all. But this time the GOP had raiser thin margins on election night, and they disappeared after all the outstanding ballots were counted.

Ironically, it was Republicans that pushed for the verification processes that result in these ballots taking so long to be counted.

Calling it voter fraud like the GOP has just goes to show they are well aware of how ignorant their base is of basic election workings, and that they'll eat up anything they say.

In FL, you have until 30 minutes after the polls close to give a count.

 

[WCH]

In Georgia? With their history of racism? With the current POTUS normalizing racism in the USA? Yeah, I'm willing to bet the majority of people who lost their votes were non-white.

What do you think?

GA has early voting. No excuses for waiting until the last day.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

In FL, you have until 30 minutes after the polls close to give a count.

So if a ballot isn't counted in that 30 minutes, what happens to it?

 

[Individual]

Quite right.



They should, but I have a question.

IF the electoral regulations are controlled by "Party A" and "Party A" knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that a large number of the supporters for "Party B" did not prove "Qualification X" (let's call it "a street address" [even though they have lived in houses with known locations for most of their lives and are acknowledged to be "citizens"]), THEN would you consider that it would qualify as "voter suppression" to require potential voters to prove "Qualification X" in order to vote?

Hypothetical "IF" questions are always worded to produce an intended answer, yours appears to expect a "yes" response, correct?

IMO it should no longer be necessary to register to vote, with the exception of primaries. I grew up when social security numbers had to be applied for, but now they are assigned at birth, so it would not be difficult at all to include a QR code for voter ID at the same time, kept in a local data base, uploaded to both a State and Federal data base. Then the QR code could be scanned, and confirmed in the Federal maintained data base to confirm a valid voter in a local, State, or Federal election has voted, and voted only once. People who move would simply be required to have their QR code scanned to be added, if necessary to another local or State data base AND removed from where it was previously stored, keeping the data base up to date. Failure to do so might result in their vote being suppressed due to their own negligence.

 

[WCH]

So if a ballot isn't counted in that 30 minutes, what happens to it?

They end up in the trunk of an Avis rental? IDK

I suggest using early voting to avoid having your vote not counted. It's stupid to not have it everywhere.

 

[jimbo]

From what I understand(note edit/added link in OP) that approx 18 K voters were denied their legal right to vote

That's an accusation only. From the losing side.

 

[Individual]

Is this still an issue?
Last I saw the vote count was:
Kemp 1,978,408 - 50.22%
Abrams 1,923,685 - 48.83%
Metz 37,235 - 0.95%

Abrams seems to have lost by 54,723 votes.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Hypothetical "IF" questions are always worded to produce an intended answer, yours appears to expect a "yes" response, correct?

My "expectation" is irrelevant, what I WANTED was your opinion.

IMO it should no longer be necessary to register to vote, with the exception of primaries. I grew up when social security numbers had to be applied for, but now they are assigned at birth, so it would not be difficult at all to include a QR code for voter ID at the same time, kept in a local data base, uploaded to both a State and Federal data base. Then the QR code could be scanned, and confirmed in the Federal maintained data base to confirm a valid voter in a local, State, or Federal election has voted, and voted only once. People who move would simply be required to have their QR code scanned to be added, if necessary to another local or State data base AND removed from where it was previously stored, keeping the data base up to date. Failure to do so might result in their vote being suppressed due to their own negligence.[/QUOTE]

An interesting and technically feasible suggestion.

Of course, it's impossible to counterfeit QR codes and the government data bases are absolutely impervious to unauthorized entry.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

They end up in the trunk of an Avis rental? IDK

If a ballot must be counted within 30 minutes in order for it to be included in the report of votes cast, then a ballot that is NOT counted within 30 minutes is NOT included in the report of votes cast and does NOT count towards determining who won an election.

Wouldn't that seem obvious?

So, if the person who is in charge of the vote counting, says something like "First we'll separate the votes into two piles and then we will count the votes in each pile one after the other." and ALL of the votes for "Candidate R" get counted in 20 minutes but only half the votes for "Candidate D" get counted in the remaining 10 minutes, what are the odds that "Candidate R" will be declared the winner if the actual percentage of the vote is "Candidate R" (40%) and "Candidate D" (60%)?

I suggest using early voting to avoid having your vote not counted. It's stupid to not have it everywhere.

You do know that "early votes" are NOT counted until AFTER the polls close (which, I presume, starts the 30 minute clock running) - don't you?

 

[Individual]

My "expectation" is irrelevant, what I WANTED was your opinion.

I gave my opinion.

"IMO it should no longer be necessary to register to vote, with the exception of primaries. I grew up when social security numbers had to be applied for, but now they are assigned at birth, so it would not be difficult at all to include a QR code for voter ID at the same time, kept in a local data base, uploaded to both a State and Federal data base. Then the QR code could be scanned, and confirmed in the Federal maintained data base to confirm a valid voter in a local, State, or Federal election has voted, and voted only once. People who move would simply be required to have their QR code scanned to be added, if necessary to another local or State data base AND removed from where it was previously stored, keeping the data base up to date. Failure to do so might result in their vote being suppressed due to their own negligence." <-- My words you're responding to.

An interesting and technically feasible suggestion.



Of course, it's impossible to counterfeit QR codes and the government data bases are absolutely impervious to unauthorized entry.

Perhaps even something worth pursuing?

Obviously mankind is incapable of creating perfection. I suggested a QR code a they are easy to create, and simple to scan and retrieve a large quantity of data quickly and accurately. Have you a better idea?

 

[Phys251]

Nothing like mangled stories circulated to inflame the volatiles. I'm sorry, however you characterize it, Abrams came closer than she had any right to expect.

If there was anyone being suppressed it sure ain't Abrams.

You're leaving one key element out of your analysis which changes it entirely.

 

[RileyCoyote]

So glad this dumb, fat, lying, socialist pig is not the governor of the state I live in. What an embarrassing idiot she made of herself.

 

[WCH]

If a ballot must be counted within 30 minutes in order for it to be included in the report of votes cast, then a ballot that is NOT counted within 30 minutes is NOT included in the report of votes cast and does NOT count towards determining who won an election.

Wouldn't that seem obvious?

So, if the person who is in charge of the vote counting, says something like "First we'll separate the votes into two piles and then we will count the votes in each pile one after the other." and ALL of the votes for "Candidate R" get counted in 20 minutes but only half the votes for "Candidate D" get counted in the remaining 10 minutes, what are the odds that "Candidate R" will be declared the winner if the actual percentage of the vote is "Candidate R" (40%) and "Candidate D" (60%)?



You do know that "early votes" are NOT counted until AFTER the polls close (which, I presume, starts the 30 minute clock running) - don't you?

Electronic and early voting would cure a lot of that. There's a reason for the madness.

Regardless, the counting is over and done. Maybe they'll figure it out by the next election.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I gave my opinion.

Your

IMO it should no longer be necessary to register to vote, with the exception of primaries. I grew up when social security numbers had to be applied for, but now they are assigned at birth, so it would not be difficult at all to include a QR code for voter ID at the same time, kept in a local data base, uploaded to both a State and Federal data base. Then the QR code could be scanned, and confirmed in the Federal maintained data base to confirm a valid voter in a local, State, or Federal election has voted, and voted only once. People who move would simply be required to have their QR code scanned to be added, if necessary to another local or State data base AND removed from where it was previously stored, keeping the data base up to date. Failure to do so might result in their vote being suppressed due to their own negligence."
​

is not in the least bit responsive to my

IF the electoral regulations are controlled by "Party A" and "Party A" knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that a large number of the supporters for "Party B" did not prove "Qualification X" (let's call it "a street address" [even though they have lived in houses with known locations for most of their lives and are acknowledged to be "citizens"]), THEN would you consider that it would qualify as "voter suppression" to require potential voters to prove "Qualification X" in order to vote?
​

Perhaps even something worth pursuing?

Indeed it is - PROVIDED that the agency responsible for implementation is NOT one that is "politically loaded" (i.e. doesn't "adjust" the criteria for accepting those QR codes).

Of course, just having (even 100% safe and "unjiggered") QR codes doesn't deal with the issue of any "politically loaded" determination of the assignment of those votes to particular electoral districts in order to produce the desired outcome (read as "so that 'Our Guys' always win") of elections.

Obviously mankind is incapable of creating perfection. I suggested a QR code a they are easy to create, and simple to scan and retrieve a large quantity of data quickly and accurately. Have you a better idea?

Not really - although I suspect that there are others that are just as good (given the caveats above).

 

[Individual]

Your

IMO it should no longer be necessary to register to vote, with the exception of primaries. I grew up when social security numbers had to be applied for, but now they are assigned at birth, so it would not be difficult at all to include a QR code for voter ID at the same time, kept in a local data base, uploaded to both a State and Federal data base. Then the QR code could be scanned, and confirmed in the Federal maintained data base to confirm a valid voter in a local, State, or Federal election has voted, and voted only once. People who move would simply be required to have their QR code scanned to be added, if necessary to another local or State data base AND removed from where it was previously stored, keeping the data base up to date. Failure to do so might result in their vote being suppressed due to their own negligence."
​

is not in the least bit responsive to my

IF the electoral regulations are controlled by "Party A" and "Party A" knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that a large number of the supporters for "Party B" did not prove "Qualification X" (let's call it "a street address" [even though they have lived in houses with known locations for most of their lives and are acknowledged to be "citizens"]), THEN would you consider that it would qualify as "voter suppression" to require potential voters to prove "Qualification X" in order to vote?
​

Correct, because my opinion of your question, 'Hypothetical "IF" questions are always worded to produce an intended answer, yours appears to expect a "yes" response, correct?', preceded my opinion on resolving the issue.

Indeed it is - PROVIDED that the agency responsible for implementation is NOT one that is "politically loaded" (i.e. doesn't "adjust" the criteria for accepting those QR codes).

And your recommendation on how to prevent such from occurring?

Of course, just having (even 100% safe and "unjiggered") QR codes doesn't deal with the issue of any "politically loaded" determination of the assignment of those votes to particular electoral districts in order to produce the desired outcome (read as "so that 'Our Guys' always win") of elections.

Again, your recommendation for preventing?

Not really - although I suspect that there are others that are just as good (given the caveats above).

Do we agree our voting system should be fair and unbiased without favouring ANY political party?
If you can honestly answer that question with a yes then rather than habitually complain, why not attempt to contribute by discussing ways we might agree to implement changes which would produce such a result?

 

[ajn678]

What does her weight have to do with anything?

Being obese shows a lack of self control.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Being obese shows a lack of self control.

So, IOW, it has nothing to do with anything.

 

[Anthony60]

Note how much Democrats are willing to fight to get their elections won. What do Republicans do? No investigations, no lawsuits, nothing. They're pathetic.

What's wrong with them, just accepting the election results? That implies that we have fair elections in this country.

Well, at least when a Democrat wins. If a Republican wins, it's fixed. Then, it's off to the courts to bypass the actual laws and rules for the election, and have a judge make them up as we go. Then the Democrats started "finding" boxes of votes in cars, class rooms, etc... that all have more votes for Democrats. Go figure? Who knows where they came from, or if they are tampered with? It doesn't matter because EVERY VOTE MUST BE COUNTED!

 

[Anthony60]

She lost. Now Stacy can maybe ask her friend Oparah for some help losing all the weight at weight watchers.

She is unfairly using more gravity than she should. She is concentrating more weight in her own personal space, which I'm sure contributes to global warming, or climate change, or whatever it is now.

 

[Deuce]

Note how much Democrats are willing to fight to get their elections won. What do Republicans do? No investigations, no lawsuits, nothing. They're pathetic.

Because Republicans are the ones cheating on a far grander scale, they have less to sue the other side over.

 

[Deuce]

She is unfairly using more gravity than she should. She is concentrating more weight in her own personal space, which I'm sure contributes to global warming, or climate change, or whatever it is now.

What do you mean “whatever it is now”? Both terms have been used for decades.

 

[Renae]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ories_abramselection-1120a:homepage/story-ans




I think she will. Then off to the Courts.
She must show that enough voters were illegally disenfranchised of their lawful right to vote
Presently that would entail approx 18 K voters denied their right to vote

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/us/politics/georgia-abrams-kemp-voting.html

Democrats, can't accept the results when they lose.