Georgia Voter Integrity Laws

[flockofseagulls104]

MLB, the President of Earth (who is on this ballot on the democrat side, and I assume is unopposed) and the radical woke democrat party all piled on my state of Georgia for actually learning from the 2020 election and passing SOME measures to make voting in our state more accurate and a little less vulnerable to fraud. (IMO they did not do all they should have, but it is what it is).

All of these entities claimed (and I will use their favorite, approved phrase here) WITHOUT EVIDENCE that it would cause large and unspecified disenfranchisement (big word they use to describe whatever they want it to). MLB took the All Star Game out of Atlanta, harming many local minority-owned businesses here. The usual Hollywood suspects used their celebrity status and access to the biased media to slam Georgia, and many film and TV projects decided to boycott Georgia. And many other various boycotts and cancelations.

Well, in our first statewide election since those laws were passed, Voter turnout is 189% HIGHER at this point than it was in the last statewide primary election. And that does not even include Election Day.

https://sos.ga.gov/news/record-early-vo ... ontinues-4

How can that be? And this is not even a general election. This is a party primary. And voter turnout is up 153% from the 2020 National Election.

Will we get any apology from the usual suspects? We will not be holding our collective breath.

[silverscreenselect]

A substantial number of voters indicated that they voted early in person because they were afraid that their mail-in absentee ballots would not be accepted. And voter groups worked on changing the traditional Sunday Souls to the Polls push in minority churches to a Saturday push instead. It will be interesting to see just what the absentee ballot totals look like this year in comparison to two years ago.

[flockofseagulls104]

It is interesting to me that the same people, like the one above ^^^, who are nitpicking and damning the evidence presented in 2000 Mules that demonstrates the possibility of ACTUAL widespread voter fraud and disenfranchisement, keep clinging to and blindly supporting the idea that requiring voters to show proof of who they are is 'disenfranchising' a substantial group of people. WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE except a decades old, totally flawed telephone survey.

[silverscreenselect]

A substantial number of voters indicated that they voted early in person because they were afraid that their mail-in absentee ballots would not be accepted. And voter groups worked on changing the traditional Sunday Souls to the Polls push in minority churches to a Saturday push instead. It will be interesting to see just what the absentee ballot totals look like this year in comparison to two years ago.

And I just found an answer to my question, although it's not a perfect matchup. In the 2020 general election, there were 1.3 million absentee ballots cast. As of yesterday (absentee ballots must arrive by 7:00 pm today to be valid), only 71,500 absentee ballots had been returned.

[BackInTex]

A substantial number of voters indicated that they voted early in person because they were afraid that their mail-in absentee ballots would not be accepted. And voter groups worked on changing the traditional Sunday Souls to the Polls push in minority churches to a Saturday push instead. It will be interesting to see just what the absentee ballot totals look like this year in comparison to two years ago.

And I just found an answer to my question, although it's not a perfect matchup. In the 2020 general election, there were 1.3 million absentee ballots cast. As of yesterday (absentee ballots must arrive by 7:00 pm today to be valid), only 71,500 absentee ballots had been returned.

That's a good thing. 1.3 million people were not absent in 2020.

[BackInTex]

A substantial number of voters indicated that they voted early in person because they were afraid that their mail-in absentee ballots would not be accepted. And voter groups worked on changing the traditional Sunday Souls to the Polls push in minority churches to a Saturday push instead. It will be interesting to see just what the absentee ballot totals look like this year in comparison to two years ago.

And I just found an answer to my question, although it's not a perfect matchup. In the 2020 general election, there were 1.3 million absentee ballots cast. As of yesterday (absentee ballots must arrive by 7:00 pm today to be valid), only 71,500 absentee ballots had been returned.

That's a good thing. 1.3 million people were not absent in 2020.

[silverscreenselect]

That's a good thing. 1.3 million people were not absent in 2020.

You're right about that. Georgia initiated no-excuse absentee voting in 2005, with Republicans pushing to get it passed. It wasn't used all that much until the 2020 election, when drop boxes were added and people were concerned about going to vote in person due to the pandemic.

Among the new laws passed in 2021 were added restrictions on eligibility for absentee voting. Now, it's limited to those over 65, physically disabled, or will be out of town on election day. Voters also have a tighter time frame to request absentee ballots (11-49 days before the election as opposed to 3-180 days before the election in 2020). Also, local election offices could only send out ballots 29 days before the election as opposed to 49 in 2020. So all those changes had the desired effect, making it more difficult for people to vote absentee.

[flockofseagulls104]

A substantial number of voters indicated that they voted early in person because they were afraid that their mail-in absentee ballots would not be accepted. And voter groups worked on changing the traditional Sunday Souls to the Polls push in minority churches to a Saturday push instead. It will be interesting to see just what the absentee ballot totals look like this year in comparison to two years ago.

And I just found an answer to my question, although it's not a perfect matchup. In the 2020 general election, there were 1.3 million absentee ballots cast. As of yesterday (absentee ballots must arrive by 7:00 pm today to be valid), only 71,500 absentee ballots had been returned.

That's a good thing. 1.3 million people were not absent in 2020.

Hmm, pretty interesting.
Absentee ballots have gone down significantly. Admittedly, this is not as important an election as 2020, but still.

When you take into account that the President of the Earth and the current republicans (Including Brad Raffensberger, the same Brad who is contesting TTV, and who the stalker continues to quote) came to an 'agreement', the infamous Judicial Consent Decree, in which:

The state of Georgia arbitrarily changed state law on signature verification of absentee ballots via a March 2020 judicial consent decree with Georgia Democrats — without ever going to the state legislature. It changed the statutory requirement that the signature must match the signature on the voter registration card to simply matching the signature on the absentee ballot application.

They did this WITHOUT going to the legislature, which, as Trump pointed out on many other things that happened in 2020, is not, shall we say, kosher.

So absentee ballots now have to have the signature checked back to the signature on the voter's registration. Pretty big difference there.
Could possibly be why there ain't so many of them being sent in all of a sudden.

[flockofseagulls104]

Stalker is, of course, active in this thread because I posted it.

Tell me, or everyone else but me unless someone re-posts it:

You are skeptical, to say the least, of the evidence presented by 2000 Mules, (even though you haven't even seen it). So, you discount and reject it's conclusion.

Show me convincing factual, indisputable evidence that requiring someone to produce identification to prove who they are when voting results in widespread 'disenfranchisement'. Just what are you basing that on, stalker? 'Studies'? Where is the proof?

[jarnon]

Stalker is, of course, active in this thread because I posted it.

Tell me, or everyone else but me unless someone re-posts it:

You are skeptical, to say the least, of the evidence presented by 2000 Mules, (even though you haven't even seen it). So, you discount and reject it's conclusion.

Show me convincing factual, indisputable evidence that requiring someone to produce identification to prove who they are when voting results in widespread 'disenfranchisement'. Just what are you basing that on, stalker? 'Studies'? Where is the proof?

Iʻve posted repeatedly on how voter ID requirements can be politicized:

OK, I watched this video which makes the point that requiring a photo ID is not inherently discriminatory. The devil is in the details. Here in Pennsylvania, a 2012 voter ID law was struck down because it deliberately excluded types of ID favored by minorities and other Democratic voters. For example, a college student ID had to have an expiration date, which excluded the two largest urban colleges in the state, Temple and Pitt. OTOH, hunting licenses were accepted. This was no coincidence: the House majority leader said voter ID "is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania." A 2013 North Carolina law was similarly biased. A judge said it "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision."

In theory, it's possible to craft a voter ID law that's fair, or even one that favors Democrats. But history has taught us to be wary when Republican legislatures mess with voting laws.

Flockʻs nemesis posted quotes from the North Carolina judgeʻs ruling, including one about voter ID:

Another setback for bigots and racists, this time in North Carolina. And it's not just me saying that, it's the decision of the Court itself, one of the more conservative appeals courts in the country: Here's the decision: http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/7-29-16% ... v%20NC.pdf

Pertinent quotes:

As noted above, the General Assembly completely revised the list of acceptable photo IDs, removing from the list the IDs held disproportionately by African Americans, but retaining those disproportionately held by whites.

The court decision elaborates that the proposed bill was modified days after the Supreme Courtʻs Shelby County decision to remove public assistance photo IDs. OTOH, fewer urban blacks have DMV IDs which are allowed.

[flockofseagulls104]

Stalker is, of course, active in this thread because I posted it.

Tell me, or everyone else but me unless someone re-posts it:

You are skeptical, to say the least, of the evidence presented by 2000 Mules, (even though you haven't even seen it). So, you discount and reject it's conclusion.

Show me convincing factual, indisputable evidence that requiring someone to produce identification to prove who they are when voting results in widespread 'disenfranchisement'. Just what are you basing that on, stalker? 'Studies'? Where is the proof?

Iʻve posted repeatedly on how voter ID requirements can be politicized:

OK, I watched this video which makes the point that requiring a photo ID is not inherently discriminatory. The devil is in the details. Here in Pennsylvania, a 2012 voter ID law was struck down because it deliberately excluded types of ID favored by minorities and other Democratic voters. For example, a college student ID had to have an expiration date, which excluded the two largest urban colleges in the state, Temple and Pitt. OTOH, hunting licenses were accepted. This was no coincidence: the House majority leader said voter ID "is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania." A 2013 North Carolina law was similarly biased. A judge said it "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision."

In theory, it's possible to craft a voter ID law that's fair, or even one that favors Democrats. But history has taught us to be wary when Republican legislatures mess with voting laws.

Flockʻs nemesis posted quotes from the North Carolina judgeʻs ruling, including one about voter ID:

Another setback for bigots and racists, this time in North Carolina. And it's not just me saying that, it's the decision of the Court itself, one of the more conservative appeals courts in the country: Here's the decision: http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/7-29-16% ... v%20NC.pdf

Pertinent quotes:

As noted above, the General Assembly completely revised the list of acceptable photo IDs, removing from the list the IDs held disproportionately by African Americans, but retaining those disproportionately held by whites.

And I've posted repeatedly that the whole idea is to make sure that our election system is secure and everyone who is eligible to vote can vote and only vote once. That should be everyone's concern. I'm not interested in this instance or that instance. Democrats seem to always oppose voter ID laws no matter what the circumstances are. We need to protect our election system so that ALL OF US can be confident that the final results are valid. So that means that we get a list of all forms of ID that are acceptable to all sides and require these in order to vote. WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO DO? And why is anyone resisting doing it?

Since you posted this, would you support requiring voters to present an ID to vote, if it included all the forms of IDs 'disproportionately' held by African Americans?

[jarnon]

Since you posted this, would you support requiring voters to present an ID to vote, if it included all the forms of IDs 'disproportionately' held by African Americans?

I donʻt think itʻs needed, but I think it passes legal mustard.

[BackInTex]

Since you posted this, would you support requiring voters to present an ID to vote, if it included all the forms of IDs 'disproportionately' held by African Americans?

I donʻt think itʻs needed, but I think it passes legal mustard.

What are IDs 'disproportionately' held by African Americans? And are the disproprotionately the ONLY IDs these African Americans have? And if so, why?

[Bob78164]

Since you posted this, would you support requiring voters to present an ID to vote, if it included all the forms of IDs 'disproportionately' held by African Americans?

I donʻt think itʻs needed, but I think it passes legal mustard.

What are IDs 'disproportionately' held by African Americans? And are the disproprotionately the ONLY IDs these African Americans have? And if so, why?

"Why" doesn't matter. What does matter is that when North Carolina passed its voter ID laws, it first conducted a study, BY RACE, as to who held which IDs. As the Fourth Circuit found, it then targeted the IDs held primarily by people of color "with almost surgical precision." That action says, plain as day, exactly what their real goal was and is.

The other thing that matters is that Voter ID laws can only prevent voter fraud via imposters voting. But that form of voter fraud is all but non-existent, and for good reason. It's easy to catch and only affects one vote. Voter ID laws, on the other hand, prevent many thousands (if not millions) of eligible voters from actually casting their votes. So they are plainly a cure that is far, far worse than the disease. --Bob

[jarnon]

Since you posted this, would you support requiring voters to present an ID to vote, if it included all the forms of IDs 'disproportionately' held by African Americans?

I donʻt think itʻs needed, but I think it passes legal mustard.

What are IDs 'disproportionately' held by African Americans? And are the disproprotionately the ONLY IDs these African Americans have? And if so, why?

This is a serious question, so I did some research. These are the photo IDs in the North Carolina law that SSS mentioned:
Driver’s license or DMV non-driver ID
Passport
Military ID
Veterans ID
Tribal ID

These photo IDs were rejected by the Republican majority:
Student ID
Government employee ID
Public assistance ID
Expired DMV ID

A black person living in Raleigh is less likely to need a driver's license than a suburban white. A poor person is less likely to have a passport and more likely to have a public assistance ID.

You make a good observation about some IDs being disproportionately the only ID that an African American has. A suburban white student probably has a student ID in addition to their license, while it's an urban black student's only photo ID.

[silverscreenselect]

When you take into account that the President of the Earth and the current republicans (Including Brad Raffensberger, the same Brad who is contesting TTV, and who the stalker continues to quote) came to an 'agreement', the infamous Judicial Consent Decree, in which:

The state of Georgia arbitrarily changed state law on signature verification of absentee ballots via a March 2020 judicial consent decree with Georgia Democrats — without ever going to the state legislature. It changed the statutory requirement that the signature must match the signature on the voter registration card to simply matching the signature on the absentee ballot application.

They did this WITHOUT going to the legislature, which, as Trump pointed out on many other things that happened in 2020, is not, shall we say, kosher.

Flock is badly confused about this consent decree, which isn't surprising. After the 2018 election, the Democratic Party of Georgia in 2019 filed a lawsuit over conflicting requirements in the various counties for verifying absentee ballots. They claimed that these inconsistent requirements violated the equal protection clause, in that absentee ballots were rejected in one county but approved in others on the same basis. At issue was a state law that said election officials had to notify voters "promptly" if their absentee ballot was rejected (and give them a chance to correct any problems). However, the law didn't define promptly, so some counties notified voters earlier than other. Rather than litigate the issue, the Secretary of State's office entered into a consent decree, which was negotiated by the Georgia Attorney General's Office as their legal counsel. The consent decree adopted a State Election Board rule that required notification within one business day for ballots rejected within 11 days of the election and three business days for ballots rejected earlier. The decree also required a majority of election officials to reject a ballot, comparing it with all the signatures on record. Again, the earlier law was silent on this issue as well.

So what you had was a state law that was vague and that couldn't be changed before the 2020 primary elections. So state election officials entered into an agreement that specified the requirements rather than risk having a court decide the issue in a way that could have been less favorable to them. That's how settling lawsuits works.

[flockofseagulls104]

I donʻt think itʻs needed, but I think it passes legal mustard.

What are IDs 'disproportionately' held by African Americans? And are the disproprotionately the ONLY IDs these African Americans have? And if so, why?

This is a serious question, so I did some research. These are the photo IDs in the North Carolina law that SSS mentioned:
Driver’s license or DMV non-driver ID
Passport
Military ID
Veterans ID
Tribal ID

These photo IDs were rejected by the Republican majority:
Student ID
Government employee ID
Public assistance ID
Expired DMV ID

A black person living in Raleigh is less likely to need a driver's license than a suburban white. A poor person is less likely to have a passport and more likely to have a public assistance ID.

You make a good observation about some IDs being disproportionately the only ID that an African American has. A suburban white student probably has a student ID in addition to their license, while it's an urban black student's only photo ID.

If I were involved in the decision, I would vote to accept all these IDs.As long as they have photos and are back tracable.

BUT.....
I would also REQUIRE that voter rolls be kept updated as well as humanly possible to remove those who are deceased, those who move, and duplicates.
NEVER would I allow a ballot to be sent via mail to anyone who did not specifically request one. And absentee ballots will be required to be sent in BEFORE election day, and they will be verified against the registration and be counted BEFORE election day. Not after.
And early voting must be as regulated as election day voting and in person.
No automatic Motor Voter. If you want to be registered to vote, YOU have to ask or consent to be, and then it will be done.
NO ballot drop boxes.

Those would be the rules, and if that somehow disenfranchises somebody, I am sorry, but the integrity of the vote is important to EVERYBODY, and if it is important for you to vote, then you will find a way to do it. Voting is a right for all citizens. But with every right comes responsibility.

[Bob78164]

What are IDs 'disproportionately' held by African Americans? And are the disproprotionately the ONLY IDs these African Americans have? And if so, why?

This is a serious question, so I did some research. These are the photo IDs in the North Carolina law that SSS mentioned:
Driver’s license or DMV non-driver ID
Passport
Military ID
Veterans ID
Tribal ID

These photo IDs were rejected by the Republican majority:
Student ID
Government employee ID
Public assistance ID
Expired DMV ID

A black person living in Raleigh is less likely to need a driver's license than a suburban white. A poor person is less likely to have a passport and more likely to have a public assistance ID.

You make a good observation about some IDs being disproportionately the only ID that an African American has. A suburban white student probably has a student ID in addition to their license, while it's an urban black student's only photo ID.

If I were involved in the decision, I would vote to accept all these IDs.

BUT.....
I would also REQUIRE that voter rolls be kept updated as well as humanly possible to remove those who are deceased, those who move, and duplicates.
NEVER would I allow a ballot to be sent via mail to anyone who did not specifically request one. And absentee ballots will be required to be sent in BEFORE election day, and they will be verified against the registration and be counted BEFORE election day. Not after.
And early voting must be as regulated as election day voting and in person.
No Motor Voter. If you want to be registered to vote, YOU have to ask or consent to be, and then it will be done.
NO ballot drop boxes.

Those would be the rules, and if that somehow disenfranchises somebody, I am sorry, but the integrity of the vote is important to EVERYBODY, and if it is important for you to vote, then you will find a way to do it. Voting is a right for all citizens. But with every right comes responsibility.

What evidence do you have that drop boxes lead to fraudulent votes? None.

What evidence do you have that by-mail Election Day votes lead to fraudulent votes? None. In fact, your proposal is contrary to federal law, which REQUIRES that overseas military voters have the opportunity to vote by mail until Election Day, and that their votes be counted if received within 10 days (I think) after Election Day. So your proposal would actually lead to one class of voters (that typically votes Republican) getting more favorable treatment than other voters.

What evidence do you have that the default status being registration leads to fraudulent voting? None.

You just don't like these means of voting because they make it easier for groups that typically vote Democratic to vote. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

This is a serious question, so I did some research. These are the photo IDs in the North Carolina law that SSS mentioned:
Driver’s license or DMV non-driver ID
Passport
Military ID
Veterans ID
Tribal ID

These photo IDs were rejected by the Republican majority:
Student ID
Government employee ID
Public assistance ID
Expired DMV ID

A black person living in Raleigh is less likely to need a driver's license than a suburban white. A poor person is less likely to have a passport and more likely to have a public assistance ID.

You make a good observation about some IDs being disproportionately the only ID that an African American has. A suburban white student probably has a student ID in addition to their license, while it's an urban black student's only photo ID.

If I were involved in the decision, I would vote to accept all these IDs.

BUT.....
I would also REQUIRE that voter rolls be kept updated as well as humanly possible to remove those who are deceased, those who move, and duplicates.
NEVER would I allow a ballot to be sent via mail to anyone who did not specifically request one. And absentee ballots will be required to be sent in BEFORE election day, and they will be verified against the registration and be counted BEFORE election day. Not after.
And early voting must be as regulated as election day voting and in person.
No Motor Voter. If you want to be registered to vote, YOU have to ask or consent to be, and then it will be done.
NO ballot drop boxes.

Those would be the rules, and if that somehow disenfranchises somebody, I am sorry, but the integrity of the vote is important to EVERYBODY, and if it is important for you to vote, then you will find a way to do it. Voting is a right for all citizens. But with every right comes responsibility.

What evidence do you have that drop boxes lead to fraudulent votes? None.

What evidence do you have that by-mail Election Day votes lead to fraudulent votes? None. In fact, your proposal is contrary to federal law, which REQUIRES that overseas military voters have the opportunity to vote by mail until Election Day, and that their votes be counted if received within 10 days (I think) after Election Day. So your proposal would actually lead to one class of voters (that typically votes Republican) getting more favorable treatment than other voters.

What evidence do you have that the default status being registration leads to fraudulent voting? None.

You just don't like these means of voting because they make it easier for groups that typically vote Democratic to vote. --Bob

That is why there will always remain opportunities for fraud. People like you who will not budge an inch from your narrative. You are not in any way concerned about what is in the public interest. You are only concerned with your political party.
Yeah, bob. I am a racist. I don't want black people to vote.
Stick it where the sun don't shine.

[silverscreenselect]

Yeah, bob. I am a racist. I don't want black people to vote.
Stick it where the sun don't shine.

Actually, you don't want people to vote who are likely to vote Democratic. And a heck of a lot of them happen to be black.

Bob pointed out that there's no reason to believe that drop boxes are less secure than mailing a ballot (and running the risk of postal delays or non-deliveries). But you persist on insisting we shouldn't have dropboxes, well, because.

And perhaps you're unaware of how our Constitution is supposed to work. The right to vote is one of our fundamental Constitutional rights. Those who want to place restrictions on it have to show that less burdensome means can't accomplish the same purpose. And all the barriers Republicans keep throwing up in the name of solving a non-existent problem fly in the face of that fundamental right.

[silverscreenselect]

Looks like Donald Trump was able to get voters to support his candidates in Georgia about as well as he got them to attend his "packed house" rally where Flock got his precious wristbands.

Right now, Brian Kemp leads David Perdue 73-22%, a bigger margin than any of the pollsters predicted. Trump's pick for Attorney General, John Gordon, trails incumbent Chris Carr 74-26%. Trump's most despised Georgia Republican, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, leads Jody Hice, an even bigger Trump supporter than Flock, 51-34%. While there's no chance Hice can catch Raffensperger, if he and two other candidates hold him below 50%, there would be a runoff. The same situation exists in the Lt. Governor's race, where the Trump-endorsed Burt Jones leads Butch Miller 51-31%.

[silverscreenselect]

More of interest in Georgia. In 2018, there were 607,000 votes cast in a hotly contested Republican governor's primary. This year, there were about 1.1 million. In 2018, Stacey Abrams won a two-person race for governor in which 555,000 votes were cast. This year, Abrams was unopposed, but in the Senate race, in which Raphael Warnock faced token opposition, there were 630,000 votes cast.

In Georgia, voters request either a Republican or Democratic primary ballot when they show up to vote (or request an absentee ballot). Anyone voting Democratic in the primary must vote Democratic in a runoff as well (and vice versa). About 7% of voters who requested Democratic ballots in 2018 requested Republican ballots this time, while only about 1% of those who requested Republican ballots in 2018 asked for Democratic ballots this time.

Anecdotally, a number of people who said they would be voting Democratic in the fall asked for Republican ballots specifically because they were afraid of Jody Hice becoming Secretary of State. The feeling is that Raffensperger will be much more likely to run a fair election. By the way, Bee Nguyen, the likely Democratic candidate has been very influential in shaping voting laws here in Georgia. Bad as some of these laws are, Democrats in the General Assembly were able to get some concessions.

[Bob Juch]

Brad Raffensperger, the Republican who defied Donald Trump in 2020 and earned his wrath, defeated Jody Hice to win Georgia’s secretary of state primary.

[silverscreenselect]

Brad Raffensperger, the Republican who defied Donald Trump in 2020 and earned his wrath, defeated Jody Hice to win Georgia’s secretary of state primary.

Raffensperger ran a very smart campaign and Hice ran a very dumb one. Hice spent most of his time on right-wing talk radio shows and similar small gatherings, in essence the voters he already had. I never saw him run a single commercial. Supposedly, he was saving his money for the runoff. Raffensperger ran on his record. His commercials mentioned him standing up to Stacey Abrams but were silent about Trump. Incidentally, Kemp pretty much did the same thing, never mentioning Trump but lumping Perdue with Stacey Abrams.

There's a Democratic runoff for Secretary of State, but the likely winner, Bee Nguyen, is a strong candidate.