• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

In Huge News: Governor of Georgia says "Feel Free to Order Uber Eats" to the Peasants

That is what ballot curing is for. Or simply not letting amateurs or those who would toss for any signature (and get the single say on it) make that decision. There are plenty of things that can be done. Or we could make it verifiable through codes and knowledge. Notification that your ballot was deemed "questionable", now you provide info related to your life and identity, things that can even be provided online after receiving such a message. That notification should come to either a phone number or email (or both) given by the person upon registration and can be changed online only with other info. This really isn't that hard unless you want to make it so.

And how many ballots did Colorado reject this cycle? And look, they see a problem and actually aim to fix that problem, so many rejected ballots with real solutions that get more votes accepted.

Yes, but it would have to be something convienient, something you carry around every day - you know, like the code on your ID. Great idea.

Also, if they haven't already, maybe they should also adopt a system similar to what Georgia has, where you can go online and check the status of your ballot at any time.
 
Yes, but it would have to be something convienient, something you carry around every day - you know, like the code on your ID. Great idea.

Also, if they haven't already, maybe they should also adopt a system similar to what Georgia has, where you can go online and check the status of your ballot at any time.
Or the last 4 of your SSN and your mother's maiden name or grandmother's maiden name or the name of the hospital or town you were born in, or combinations of these things. Things you can remember but others wouldn't likely know all or most of these.

So tell me, how is something like that ID card number going to keep Momma's boy from voting in her place? Do you believe that he wouldn't be willing to just go into her purse or wherever she keeps that and put that onto the envelope? Afterall, that seems to be the most common form of voter fraud we have any sort of evidence for, voting in place of people you actually know, have access to.
 
Last edited:
Now, as we all have heard recently, Georgia just introduced a new voting law - reducing hours - and reducing ballot locations. BUT, in great and exciting news today: Governor Kemp let voters know "Feel free to buy some shit if you want".

This is a huge victory for America today. Now you can pay a poll tax to UberEats so that you don't pass out! Thank you Kemp.


Still waiting on some actual facts. Kemp did not say the quoted line, georgia didnt reduce hours or voting locations, and there is no requirement to pay a poll tax to ubereats. So whats left of this topic?

The governor said if people want to eat while waiting to vote, they can. So what?
 
They already did, you just don't approve. You think that the only thing that matters is time for early voting, despite the fact that we are talking about states with very different population levels and concentrations. Show me where Connecticut citizens are having issues with lines or a significant number are requesting more days to vote.
No, they didn't. CT still has some of the most restrictive voting laws in the country.

Georgia's long lines are mostly due to local election officials being unable to keep up with a surge in population - given that CT is a state in decline, without any large cities (nevermind one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country), I wouldn't expect that to be as much of an issue.
 
No, they didn't. CT still has some of the most restrictive voting laws in the country.

Georgia's long lines are mostly due to local election officials being unable to keep up with a surge in population - given that CT is a state in decline, without any large cities (nevermind one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country), I wouldn't expect that to be as much of an issue.
Again, according to who? Because other people who actually study such things disagree.


According to him, Connecticut is 20th for ease of voting, whereas Georgia was already 49th. Why should your assessment matter more than his? And the fact that they do not have any large concentrations of people means that they shouldn't be easily compared to Georgia the way you are trying, with only caring about how many days they give for early voting. It would only matter if it had a significant impact actually on voting, ability to vote.

Georgia's long lines are due to a lot things.
 
so water is now a gift?
If you don't believe that water can be purchased and provided at a cost, please PM me and we will set your accounts up to handle my monthly bill :)
 
Georgia had to crib notes for something that simple?

Possibly. Possibly they just anticipated a bunch of screaming, foolish, hysteria, and figured that would be a way to head some of it off. If so, it seems to have failed, given the amount of false claims and ninnyism they've had to deal with since.

You still never addressed why you think GA addressed this issue

I did, actually. :) post 21:


Would we likely have gotten it without the post-2020 conflict over Georgia's election. Probably not. Republicans chose to believe in widespread fantasy rather than accept that they'd lost in Georgia in 2020. Democrats chose to believe in widespread fantasy rather than accept that they'd lost in Georgia in 2018. As a result of both sides' leaders telling them not to trust Georgia's electoral system target than just admitting they freaking lost, it makes sense that trust in that system would be pretty low.


(and made it worse by restricting mail in voting) and not

As I think I've shown you before, this law actually sightly increases voter access. Not least by requiring all Localities to allow voters to start requesting those mail in ballots 11 weeks in advance.

the fundamental problem of ridiculously long voting lines in black neighborhoods.

That would be the fault of the Localities, which were the government entities responsible for establishing and running things like polling locations. Let's see, which party typically runs black-dominated localities.....

Regardless, I bet you sure are happy the Georgia State level legislature took greater control over how elections would be run, so that it would no longer be in the hands of those responsible for creating what you say is the Fundamental Problem. :)
 
Possibly. Possibly they just anticipated a bunch of screaming, foolish, hysteria, and figured that would be a way to head some of it off. If so, it seems to have failed, given the amount of false claims and ninnyism they've had to deal with since.



I did, actually. :) post 21:

Would we likely have gotten it without the post-2020 conflict over Georgia's election. Probably not. Republicans chose to believe in widespread fantasy rather than accept that they'd lost in Georgia in 2020. Democrats chose to believe in widespread fantasy rather than accept that they'd lost in Georgia in 2018. As a result of both sides' leaders telling them not to trust Georgia's electoral system target than just admitting they freaking lost, it makes sense that trust in that system would be pretty low.




As I think I've shown you before, this law actually sightly increases voter access. Not least by requiring all Localities to allow voters to start requesting those mail in ballots 11 weeks in advance.



That would be the fault of the Localities, which were the government entities responsible for establishing and running things like polling locations. Let's see, which party typically runs black-dominated localities.....

Regardless, I bet you sure are happy the Georgia State level legislature took greater control over how elections would be run, so that it would no longer be in the hands of those responsible for creating what you say is the Fundamental Problem. :)
LOL. Oh yeah. It’s the DEMOCRATS fault that their voters have less polling places and have to stand in line for hours. Who do you think funds the local election boards?

You really dont actually believe that, do you? You think in 2018 they put up a big stink about unfair voting but never got around to doing anything about the part they control themselves? False claims and ninnyism, meet thyself.

Here’s some background for ya.

 
I'm.prepared to accept your claim that it's not different than other states. I've always respected you here as a poster.

:) Thank you for that. Kind words are often truest when they come from someone who may otherwise disagree with you, and specially prized.

So the question becomes why are they doing what they're doing? They aren't addressing fraud, as there wasn't any anybody can find that amounts to anything.

They wouldn't do anything to facilitate voting. High turnout means they lose, usually.

So if it isn't suppressive, and they wouldn't facilitate, and there was no fraud to address, what is the purpose of that many changes? Why do it at all?

Copying from a previous answer to what send to be another version of your question:


Would we likely have gotten it without the post-2020 conflict over Georgia's election. Probably not. Republicans chose to believe in widespread fantasy rather than accept that they'd lost in Georgia in 2020. Democrats chose to believe in widespread fantasy rather than accept that they'd lost in Georgia in 2018. As a result of both sides' leaders telling them not to trust Georgia's electoral system target than just admitting they freaking lost, it makes sense that trust in that system would be pretty low.

However, the measures passed are pretty anodyne, and I find the freak out and lies about them from Democrats to be another iteration of choosing-widespread-fantasy for partisan reasons. So, I called Stacey Abrams out as a liar, I called Trump out as a liar, and I'm going to call out the "This Is Jim Crow Because The Other Tribe Is The Baddies And It's Different When We Do It" crap as a lie, also. :(

In the words of a former President, we are all getting Wee Wee'd up over basically nothing. :-/
 
LOL. Oh yeah. It’s the DEMOCRATS fault that their voters have less polling places and have to stand in line for hours. Who do you think funds the local election boards?

You really dont actually believe that, do you? You think in 2018 they put up a big stink about unfair voting but never got around to doing anything about the part they control themselves? False claims and ninnyism, meet thyself.

Here’s some background for ya.

It's an interesting read - thank you for the link. I don't know if it's quite what you were going for:

From your link:

The growth in registered voters has outstripped the number of available polling places in both predominantly white and Black neighborhoods. But the lines to vote have been longer in Black areas, because Black voters are more likely than whites to cast their ballots in person on Election Day and are more reluctant to vote by mail, according to U.S. census data and recent studies...

Huh. Interesting. So, at least prior to COVID throwing everything temporarily out of whack, according to your source, those long lines can be laid at the feet of the higher propensity of african americans to show up to vote in person on the day of.

Hm. Does it describe elections as locally controlled?

Georgia's state leadership and elections officials have largely ignored complaints about poll consolidations even as they tout record growth in voter registration. As secretary of state from 2010 to 2018, when most of Georgia's poll closures occurred, Brian Kemp, now the governor, took a laissez-faire attitude toward county-run election practices, save for a 2015 document that spelled out methods officials could use to shutter polling places to show "how the change can benefit voters and the public interest."...

Hm. It seems that it does. Is anyone responsible for overseeing this at the State level?

Since the Shelby decision, the Georgia State Election Board, chaired by Raffensperger, has been the primary body for investigating and potentially sanctioning counties found to have violated election laws and procedures...​

Ah. This Raffensperger guy. That's the Republican who famously went toe-to-toe against a President of his own party to defend election integrity. He's certainly demonstrated that he's pretty trustworthy, and willing to pay a price to do the right thing. I wonder if he's tried to do anything about this issue.

[T]he Georgia Senate considered a proposal filed in February and endorsed by Raffensperger. It would have required county elections supervisors to add more equipment or poll workers, or split up any precincts with more than 2,000 voters, if there was a wait longer than an hour measured at three points on Election Day.

...."We know that we need a more diverse pool of voting locations to spread the load of voters that we are anticipating," Raffensperger said.....

More than 1,500 of Georgia's 2,655 precincts have at least 2,000 voters — many of them in urban Democratic counties — and Raffensperger said at the time that voters should never have to wait more than 30 minutes.

But the bill, SB 463, was opposed by Democratic lawmakers and voting rights groups, who argued that any revamping in an election year would cause confusion and create more ways to keep people from casting their ballot....​

Huh. Looks like he did.

I wonder if State level Democrats now admit that may have been an error?

Nikema Williams, chair of Georgia's Democratic Party, said that while state officials took little or no action to stop widespread voting problems in nonwhite communities, local elections officials are also responsible, since they ultimately decide whether to close or open more voting sites....​

Huh. Looks like they think it's local officials who are responsible for closing polling places, but don't take any responsibility themselves for opposing the measures they now claim are needed.
 
In the words of a former President, we are all getting Wee Wee'd up over basically nothing. :-/

Taking the legal power to oversee elections away from the AG is not "nothing". It's an opportunity to for the Republicans to take complete management of elections. Face up to it, your real problem is the effectiveness of Stacy Abrams and there is no way to legislate her out of existence.
 
Taking the legal power to oversee elections away from the AG is not "nothing". It's an opportunity to for the Republicans to take complete management of elections.

Huh. I bet you must be really upset about HR 1 and the attempt to replicate that at the national level.

Face up to it, your real problem is the effectiveness of Stacy Abrams and there is no way to legislate her out of existence.
:snorts: no. :) Abrams and Trump are both free to go off and push foolish lies about how they Really Didn't Lose together.
 
It's an interesting read - thank you for the link. I don't know if it's quite what you were going for:

From your link:

The growth in registered voters has outstripped the number of available polling places in both predominantly white and Black neighborhoods. But the lines to vote have been longer in Black areas, because Black voters are more likely than whites to cast their ballots in person on Election Day and are more reluctant to vote by mail, according to U.S. census data and recent studies...

Huh. Interesting. So, at least prior to COVID throwing everything temporarily out of whack, according to your source, those long lines can be laid at the feet of the higher propensity of african americans to show up to vote in person on the day of.

Hm. Does it describe elections as locally controlled?

Georgia's state leadership and elections officials have largely ignored complaints about poll consolidations even as they tout record growth in voter registration. As secretary of state from 2010 to 2018, when most of Georgia's poll closures occurred, Brian Kemp, now the governor, took a laissez-faire attitude toward county-run election practices, save for a 2015 document that spelled out methods officials could use to shutter polling places to show "how the change can benefit voters and the public interest."...

Hm. It seems that it does. Is anyone responsible for overseeing this at the State level?


Since the Shelby decision, the Georgia State Election Board, chaired by Raffensperger, has been the primary body for investigating and potentially sanctioning counties found to have violated election laws and procedures...


Ah. This Raffensperger guy. That's the Republican who famously went toe-to-toe against a President of his own party to defend election integrity. He's certainly demonstrated that he's pretty trustworthy, and willing to pay a price to do the right thing. I wonder if he's tried to do anything about this issue.


[T]he Georgia Senate considered a proposal filed in February and endorsed by Raffensperger. It would have required county elections supervisors to add more equipment or poll workers, or split up any precincts with more than 2,000 voters, if there was a wait longer than an hour measured at three points on Election Day.


...."We know that we need a more diverse pool of voting locations to spread the load of voters that we are anticipating," Raffensperger said.....


More than 1,500 of Georgia's 2,655 precincts have at least 2,000 voters — many of them in urban Democratic counties — and Raffensperger said at the time that voters should never have to wait more than 30 minutes.


But the bill, SB 463, was opposed by Democratic lawmakers and voting rights groups, who argued that any revamping in an election year would cause confusion and create more ways to keep people from casting their ballot....


Huh. Looks like he did.

I wonder if State level Democrats now admit that may have been an error?


Nikema Williams, chair of Georgia's Democratic Party, said that while state officials took little or no action to stop widespread voting problems in nonwhite communities, local elections officials are also responsible, since they ultimately decide whether to close or open more voting sites....


Huh. Looks like they think it's local officials who are responsible for closing polling places, but don't take any responsibility themselves for opposing the measures they now claim are needed.
So you’re still saying that the local Democrats are to blame because they make their voters stand in hours long lines. So bad that one of the *strongest predictors* in Georgia for time waiting in line to vote is race. And the GOP is doing all they can to help but, something something the Democrats refuse the assistance.

You’re really going with that?
 
So you’re still saying that the local Democrats are to blame because they make their voters stand in hours long lines. So bad that one of the *strongest predictors* in Georgia for time waiting in line to vote is race. And the GOP is doing all they can to help but, something something the Democrats refuse the assistance.

You’re really going with that?
What did your own source say?
 
What did your own source say?
A few things you seem to have missed.

First:
Since the U.S. Supreme Court's Shelby v. Holder decision in 2013 eliminated key federal oversight of election decisions in states with histories of discrimination, Georgia's voter rolls have grown by nearly 2 million people, yet polling locations have been cut statewide by nearly 10%.

And why did the GA state democrats dislike the ‘solution’ (because the GA GOP is certainly dedicated to fair voting, yanno?) the GOP put forward?

Democrats and voting rights groups said they opposed the Raffensperger-backed bill because they believed it weakened state election supervision and made it harder for people to vote. The proposal shifted even more responsibility for elections from the state to counties, "without the necessary training, funding or support,"

In other words, they wanted to get people to say (absurdly) ‘it’s the local democrats that are disenfranchising their own voters’ which..,seems successful since you already are saying that!

This, of course, leads to:

"Georgia made national news because of the breakdown in our election systems," she said. "Long lines are certainly an issue and they happen more often in under-resourced places, which tend to be where communities of color live."

Which, I’ll state again, the new GA laws that you’re championing increase ease of voting did NOT address, even though its a clear problem.

And it’s no coincidence, as the article clearly shows, that the problem goes back to the repeal of the Voters Rights Act, which specifically gave GA the green light to disenfranchise Democratic voters, especially ones of color.
 
A few things you seem to have missed.

First:

And why did the GA state democrats dislike the ‘solution’ (because the GA GOP is certainly dedicated to fair voting, yanno?) the GOP put forward?

In other words, they wanted to get people to say (absurdly) ‘it’s the local democrats that are disenfranchising their own voters’ which..,seems successful since you already are saying that!

This, of course, leads to:
So, we can certainly say that, according to your own source, long lines in Georgia are generally the result of greater prior propensity of some groups to vote in person on the day of the election, combined with polling consolidation, which was controlled by the local government.

I guess there is only one thing left to test of your question - whether african american dominated Localities tend to be Governed by Democrats. Should we start looking up Georgia county government and see?
 
So, we can certainly say that, according to your own source, long lines in Georgia are generally the result of greater prior propensity of some groups to vote in person on the day of the election, combined with polling consolidation, which was controlled by the local government.

I guess there is only one thing left to test of your question - whether african american dominated Localities tend to be Governed by Democrats. Should we start looking up Georgia county government and see?
You’re welcome to do that, although you might want to check If county government is actually calling the shots.

But I can’t help but notice you still dance around the main point. You recognize long voter lines in urban areas are a major problem,but keep ducking the basic fact that the GA laws didn’t even look at fixing it.
 
You’re welcome to do that, although you might want to check If county government is actually calling the shots.

According to your source, it was indeed.

But I can’t help but notice you still dance around the main point. You recognize long voter lines in urban areas are a major problem,but keep ducking the basic fact that the GA laws didn’t even look at fixing it.

1. I have not said they are a major problem. I have pointed out that others such as yourself have described them in terms such as "the fundamental problem"

2. But, if that is the case, then you are left without much argument to blame Those Wacist Wepubwicans [/Loony Tunes Voice], because the level of governance responsible for polling stations is local.

3. As I've said elsewhere, I think we have too many idiots voting already. My problem with this bill is that it a) reduces the power of the Localities over the election, and b) expands ease of voting access. I'd much rather we start making it harder to vote in ways designed to weed out those less likely to have the capacity to vote well by requiring voters to pass the citizenship exam as part of registration.

But, while this bill doesn't do that, it's not Jim Crow, or voter suppression, or any of that nonsense.
 
According to your source, it was indeed.



1. I have not said they are a major problem. I have pointed out that others such as yourself have described them in terms such as "the fundamental problem"

2. But, if that is the case, then you are left without much argument to blame Those Wacist Wepubwicans [/Loony Tunes Voice], because the level of governance responsible for polling stations is local.

3. As I've said elsewhere, I think we have too many idiots voting already. My problem with this bill is that it a) reduces the power of the Localities over the election, and b) expands ease of voting access. I'd much rather we start making it harder to vote in ways designed to weed out those less likely to have the capacity to vote well by requiring voters to pass the citizenship exam as part of registration.

But, while this bill doesn't do that, it's not Jim Crow, or voter suppression, or any of that nonsense.
I agree with you about idiots voting. Trump got over 70MM votes!

But again... if voting lines weren’t a major problem, you wouldn’t have been talking about them the last 15 posts. It’s that obvious.

And you still avoid addressing the fact that this excellent voting law seems to totally not address the issue, unless it worsened it.
 
Now, as we all have heard recently, Georgia just introduced a new voting law - reducing hours - and reducing ballot locations. BUT, in great and exciting news today: Governor Kemp let voters know "Feel free to buy some shit if you want".

This is a huge victory for America today. Now you can pay a poll tax to UberEats so that you don't pass out! Thank you Kemp.


Or you can just eat before you go to vote, like normal people do.
 
I agree with you about idiots voting. Trump got over 70MM votes!

But again... if voting lines weren’t a major problem, you wouldn’t have been talking about them the last 15 posts. It’s that obvious.

And you still avoid addressing the fact that this excellent voting law seems to totally not address the issue, unless it worsened it.
The notion that lines are the Fundamental Problem is yours, not mine. My only point regarding that has been that blaming state level officials for decisions made by local level officials is foolish - if you want to get mad at a party for long lines, then, feel free to get mad at the one whose members actually made the decisions that produced them. At first you attempted to laugh off the notion that Democrats might be responsible, and accused me of falsehood, but, unfortunately, the very sources you reached for confirmed what I had told you.

I've also not claimed that the Georgia law was "excellent", any more than I've claimed that long lines were "the fundamental problem". Those are your words, which you are attempting to put in my mouth, in order to debate a Strawman. I have said that the Georgia law is mostly fairly anodyne (comparing it's measures to that of other states), that it takes away some control from the local level (comparing it to HR1's attempt to do that at the national level), and that it, unfortunately, slightly increases access.

The only avoidance I see here is your attempt to shift goalposts from racist voter suppression (which this law is not) to a discussion of lines without addressing the fact that those claims were demonstrated to be incorrect, along with your refusal to acknowledge the basic point that the problem you now claim to be most upset at was generally the result of decisions made by members of the party you support, rather than the party you wanted to blame.
 
The notion that lines are the Fundamental Problem is yours, not mine. My only point regarding that has been that blaming state level officials for decisions made by local level officials is foolish - if you want to get mad at a party for long lines, then, feel free to get mad at the one whose members actually made the decisions that produced them. At first you attempted to laugh off the notion that Democrats might be responsible, and accused me of falsehood, but, unfortunately, the very sources you reached for confirmed what I had told you.

I've also not claimed that the Georgia law was "excellent", any more than I've claimed that long lines were "the fundamental problem". Those are your words, which you are attempting to put in my mouth, in order to debate a Strawman. I have said that the Georgia law is mostly fairly anodyne (comparing it's measures to that of other states), that it takes away some control from the local level (comparing it to HR1's attempt to do that at the national level), and that it, unfortunately, slightly increases access.

The only avoidance I see here is your attempt to shift goalposts from racist voter suppression (which this law is not) to a discussion of lines without addressing the fact that those claims were demonstrated to be incorrect, along with your refusal to acknowledge the basic point that the problem you now claim to be most upset at was generally the result of decisions made by members of the party you support, rather than the party you wanted to blame.
You're the only one saying 'fundamental problem'. The fundamental problem is that the Georgia GOP is doing all they can to restrict the voting ability of democratic voters, and their main targets are black voters, because they have found effective ways to suppress their participation. Forcing them to stand in long lines is a major problem, however. Clear?

You have not presented one iota of evidence that the local democratic officials are responsible for the poor staffing, lack of polling places, etc, in these areas. In fact, if you looked (which you didnt), you'd see that local election boards are composed of an equal number of Democrats and Republicans by law. You pretend that its all the local decisions, but I think we both are smart enough to understand that funding is not done solely locally in elections, and other entities (likely the state, but I dont know, and you clearly dont either) are responsible. And while you find these laws 'anodyne'... dont you wonder why there is a huge uproar about them? Since they are no big change, seems like paying attention to the people who claim they will be hurt by them should be paid attention to?

Its simple logic....do you really think Democratic officials in Georgia are torpedoing their OWN VOTERS just to make the GOP look bad, or something?

And I guess I could rehash the whole reason WHY these are unfairly suppressing black voter turnout, but I'll just leave this link thats been posted at least five times in the thread earlier.
 
Last edited:
Because waiting in line to vote is where all the meals are had...not before or after, but in line...and no one can bring their own drink, right? Because everyone knows refreshments are a part of the voting process....

Jesus H.. Dems are such scum...
 
If Georgia was really serious about not influencing voters with gifts...or any state for that matter...then they should take up issue with Citizens United and either over ride it with a Constitutional Amendment or take it back up with the Supreme Court under new lawsuits.
 
The new law, as I understand it, only adds food and drinks to the list of gifts that can't be given out within 150 feet, which would mean that what you are describing is no de facto change.
Too bad we can't limit gifts and donations given out by corporations to candidates....wouldn't that be more effective than denying a person a bottle of water that will most likely not sway that person to vote a certain way?
 
Back
Top Bottom