Bills targeting local officials who resisted Trump could allow GOP to "overturn election results"

[Jason Warfield]

There was no fraud...no evidence can be produced of widespread fraud.

Here’s what happened: after decades of being solid red, enough blue got to vote finally and won.

Part of the problem for the reds is that Trump kept up a dialogue that the fix was in before the election...and some reds didn’t bother to vote. Then many reds did not take advantage of the mail-in ballot even though they could have...because Trump made baseless claims of fraud. On top of everything else, there was COVID which affects older Americans (many of whom are Trump supporters) so they stayed home and chose not to vote because again...Trump made up lies about voter fraud.

In other words, the reds shot themselves in the foot.

And instead of admitting that...they want to change the goal posts with new, unneeded election laws which will result in one of two things: a Supreme Court battle they can lose or again, did themselves outvoted because the Dems will play the system with everyone else.

And if the Dems win again, then what? You all are going have to grow up sometime...

 

[Taylor]

Well if Stacey Abrams says so...

 

[bomberfox]

We should be able to charge attorney generals with crimes for what Barr ordered for der trumpengroper’s photo op but the powerful are shielded for dumbass reasons.

 

[ouch]

Nobody cares about Barr.

Maybe nobody as in diehard Trumplicans. Is that because Barr got discarded by Trumplicans after he made his public statement about no widespread election fraud that would change election results found by his office?

 

[noonereal]

So why won't they agree to in-person voting with Photo-ID? Ghetto folks have to buy their booze that way, proving they can do it.

white trash need no ID to buy their opiates, do they?

 

[Scamp]

Why would anyone be against voters having an ID, unless they want to cheat?

 

[Crakhobarbie]

It sucks that the state legislatures have to take these steps to prevent a recurrence of the election fraud we've seen from the 2020 election, but the need for fraud-free elections demands these steps.

For those who complain about the actions of the state legislatures, just know that it wasn't the state legislatures who committed the fraud...but they will protect us from future fraud.

btw, they aren't criminalizing protest, as some claim. They are protecting citizens from rioters. Most people would consider that a good thing.

What sucks is the GOP is so desperate to win, they will stop at nothing, including disenfranchising voters, to gain power. Im hoping the GOP is honest with this sham third recount in Arizona. And this lie of voter fraud is finally debunked to the gop's satisfaction..... Though I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

So why won't they agree to in-person voting with Photo-ID? Ghetto folks have to buy their booze that way, proving they can do it.

Please.... Stop with your derogatory, racist comment's. It's really getting to be a bit much.

 

[CaughtInThe]

the Confederates never again want to get a "Jefferson Davis" type in the White House and simply have the voters get rid of him.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

Why would anyone be against voters having an ID, unless they want to cheat?

And exactly how does one "cheat" by not showing i.d.. Do you think there's massive numbers of people attempting to vote under someone else's name? There's absolutely no evidence to support that claim and, logically, it's absurd. .... So once you establish that people ARE NOT voting under other people's name, then you must come to the conclusion that the GOP has other motives for wanting voter i.d. laws. And that motivation is, logically, to disenfranchise low income voters who are more likely to vote democrat, and are more likely to not have valid I.d......

 

[Rawley]

And exactly how does one "cheat" by not showing i.d.. Do you think there's massive numbers of people attempting to vote under someone else's name? There's absolutely no evidence to support that claim and, logically, it's absurd. .... So once you establish that people ARE NOT voting under other people's name, then you must come to the conclusion that the GOP has other motives for wanting voter i.d. laws. And that motivation is, logically, to disenfranchise low income voters who are more likely to vote democrat, and are more likely to not have valid I.d......

Just curious. what is the "motive" for requiring voter ID in Delaware?

 

[Crakhobarbie]

Just curious. what is the "motive" for requiring voter ID in Delaware?

I don't know. But, at least in Delaware, voters who do not present proof of identity can "sign an affidavit of affirmation that the voter is the person listed on the election district record," according to Delaware Code. So, I.D. is actually NOT required.

 

[Rawley]

I don't know.

But somehow you know the GOP's motive for the same law is to "disenfranchise low income voters who are more likely to vote democrat, and are more likely to not have valid I.d......" Interesting.

But, at least in Delaware, voters who do not present proof of identity can "sign an affidavit of affirmation that the voter is the person listed on the election district record," according to Delaware Code. So, I.D. is actually NOT required.

Voters in Georgia can fill out a form and get free ID that can be used for voting. Why you have such a low opinion of the intelligence and capabilities of low income voters in Georgia?

 

[Crakhobarbie]

But somehow you know the GOP's motive for the same law is to "disenfranchise low income voters who are more likely to vote democrat, and are more likely to not have valid I.d......" Interesting.



Voters in Georgia can fill out a form and get free ID that can be used for voting. Why you have such a low opinion of the intelligence and capabilities of low income voters in Georgia?

Ok. You still have failed to establish a need. If in fact there actually has been this alleged rash of voter fraud by people voting using other people's names, then surely it will be easy for you to cite evidence of this alleged "fraud".....

 

[Eriech]

There was no fraud...no evidence can be produced of widespread fraud.

Here’s what happened: after decades of being solid red, enough blue got to vote finally and won.

Part of the problem for the reds is that Trump kept up a dialogue that the fix was in before the election...and some reds didn’t bother to vote. Then many reds did not take advantage of the mail-in ballot even though they could have...because Trump made baseless claims of fraud. On top of everything else, there was COVID which affects older Americans (many of whom are Trump supporters) so they stayed home and chose not to vote because again...Trump made up lies about voter fraud.

In other words, the reds shot themselves in the foot.

And instead of admitting that...they want to change the goal posts with new, unneeded election laws which will result in one of two things: a Supreme Court battle they can lose or again, did themselves outvoted because the Dems will play the system with everyone else.

And if the Dems win again, then what? You all are going have to grow up sometime...

6 months late but they're doing a full forensic audit in Arizona.

 

[Rawley]

Ok. You still have failed to establish a need. If in fact there actually has been this alleged rash of voter fraud by people voting using other people's names, then surely it will be easy for you to cite evidence of this alleged "fraud".....

‘Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” Jimmy Carter.

Voter fraud is difficult to detect, difficult to prove and thus, rarely prosecuted. The fact that the Democrats are so forcefully opposing such a simple common sense measure that would significantly increase everyone's confidence in the system, leads one to the conclusion that the Democrats have other motives .

 

[Crakhobarbie]

‘Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” Jimmy Carter.

Voter fraud is difficult to detect, difficult to prove and thus, rarely prosecuted. The fact that the Democrats are so forcefully opposing such a simple common sense measure that would significantly increase everyone's confidence in the system, leads one to the conclusion that the Democrats have other motives .

I asked you to cite evidence.... Since you cannot, you have to begin considering other reasons for these new voter i.d. laws.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

The fact that the Democrats are so forcefully opposing such a simple common sense measure that would significantly increase everyone's confidence in the system, leads one to the conclusion that the Democrats have other motives .

What might those motives be?

 

[rocket88]

Why would anyone be against voters having an ID, unless they want to cheat?

ID doesn't bother me, but anybody with half a brain knows it's a red herring. When it doesn't have the desired results of Republican sweeps of every election, there will be something else.

 

[Rawley]

I asked you to cite evidence.... Since you cannot, you have to begin considering other reasons for these new voter i.d. laws.

You actually asked for the need for voter ID requirement and Jimmy Carter explained the need. As far as evidence, I defer to the evidence cited in the Great State of Delaware.

 

[Rawley]

What might those motives be?

Fraud.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

Fraud.

Again, cite evidence. Why do you have such a problem citing evidence?

 

[Crakhobarbie]

You actually asked for the need for voter ID requirement and Jimmy Carter explained the need. As far as evidence, I defer to the evidence cited in the Great State of Delaware.

Why so vague? Cite evidence. You know what that means right?

 

[Rawley]

What might those motives be?

Fraud.

Again, cite evidence. Why do you have such a problem citing evidence?

Again, you didn't ask for evidence, you ask why is there a need for voter id in absentee voting. President Carter explained the need

‘Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” Jimmy Carter.

They studied election reform for quite a long time and came out with a 113 page report. They cite several instances of voter fraud, if you really care that much

https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/1472/file/3b50795b2d0374cbef5c29766256.pdf

 

[Athanasius68]

In 14 states (and possibly counting), this is the future election power grab. I hope that attorneys will work hard to deny these Trumplican election bills in court.

MSN

www.msn.com

For instance, the new law would allows the Republican-led state legislature to replace Georgia's secretary of state — currently Brad Raffensperger, who pushed back on Trump's efforts to overturn his defeat — as chair of the state elections board, and then fill a majority of the panel with their own appointees. The bill further allows the newly-appointed election board majority to suspend and temporarily replace local election officials and take over county election offices. County boards determine voter eligibility and certify election results, meaning the state board appointee would theoretically have the power to disqualify certain voters or to refuse to certify the results, according to the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. The law also bars local election officials from sending unsolicited absentee ballot applications or accepting grant money that is used by some cash-strapped counties to run elections. Voting rights advocate Stacey Abrams decried the provision as an "unprecedented power grab" intended to "alter election outcomes."

"This bill is a tragedy for democracy, and it is built on the lie of voter fraud," Lauren Groh Wargo, who heads the Abrams-founded voter advocacy group Fair Fight Action, said in a press call last month. "It means that radical, right-wing legislators, if they don't like how elections are being run ... can wholesale replace those election administrators and put folks from the other side of the state in charge."



The law could "absolutely" be used to overturn election results, Albert said, given the repeated attempts by Trump supporters, including many Georgia Republicans and even Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, to overturn the state's results last year. "Politicians will look to use any avenue available to them to maintain power. Just because it might have a few steps doesn't mean that they won't do it or figure out ways to get around those steps."

We have been through all this paranoia before.

In the real world, the new law in Georgia expands voting times, and places accountability on election officials whose bungling results in five hour waits at the polls.