Sand
Footballguy
Signature verification is witchcraft. It's a horrible method of validation.Aren't signatures matched when mail in ballots are received in?
Signature verification is witchcraft. It's a horrible method of validation.Aren't signatures matched when mail in ballots are received in?
I mean, if FLORIDA can figure it out and have secure elections, I think just about anybody can.Signature verification is witchcraft. It's a horrible method of validation.
It's also discriminatory against those without a phone or with no access to the internet or even a permanent address.And just under that is to use a website with the same technology we deem acceptable to protect trillions of dollars in the banks. It would be as secure as any transaction you do across your phone and MUCH easier to verify validity of user. Of course, that kind of access to voting will never be allowed in some states.
Absolutely no reason whatsoever for them NOT to have kiosks at voting places that people can go to.The Z Machine said:It's also discriminatory against those without a phone or with no access to the internet or even a permanent address.
I wouldn't mind it being part of a system of voting, but not the only way to cast a vote.
zoonation said:Rather than continue to post your ignorance about how the mail in voting system works, why not go educate yourself about it? You are seriously talking nonsense in here.
Should...the problem with #1...is monitoring/policing the districts and areas. Institute Voter ID...then shut down ID stations in certain areas, limit hours...and so on. Also need to address in this, the people who simply don't have the documents others may have. I would guess this becomes less and less of a problem as we move forward...but part of the issue on how this has hit minorities more is they simply did not have the SS card or original birth certificates and so on.Democrats will never learn. Playing the white supremacist/racist card on Sinema and Manchin. It really turns off voters, especially the Independents.
Here's a novel idea. Find out what portions of the Voters Right Bill the Republicans agree to and pass those portions.
1. Voter ID requirements. 80%+ of people polled want voter ID. If there is an issue with low-income voters obtaining IDs, make obtaining the ID easier and even free. Don't do away with the ID requirements.
2. Signature verification on mail-in votes. This is piggy-backing on the voter ID.
3. US citizens should be the only people allowed to vote.
4. Increased access to vote. Something like GA did, open up voting a couple weeks before the election with times available on weekends so people with jobs don't have to stand in line and vote then go to work.
These are things that Democrats and Republicans should easily be able to come together on.
1. What does a voter ID really accomplish that we don't already do? Whenever I've voted in person they look up my name and have me verify my date of birth and address, and then provide a signature. When I got my Real ID, the process was an absolute mess and it took me over 6 months. I would strongly oppose a similar process tied to someone's right to vote. It seems like a solution to a non-problem.1. Voter ID requirements. 80%+ of people polled want voter ID. If there is an issue with low-income voters obtaining IDs, make obtaining the ID easier and even free. Don't do away with the ID requirements.
2. Signature verification on mail-in votes. This is piggy-backing on the voter ID.
3. US citizens should be the only people allowed to vote.
4. Increased access to vote. Something like GA did, open up voting a couple weeks before the election with times available on weekends so people with jobs don't have to stand in line and vote then go to work.
These are things that Democrats and Republicans should easily be able to come together on.
1. What does a voter ID really accomplish that we don't already do? Whenever I've voted in person they look up my name and have me verify my date of birth and address, and then provide a signature. When I got my Real ID, the process was an absolute mess and it took me over 6 months. I would strongly oppose a similar process tied to someone's right to vote. It seems like a solution to a non-problem.
2. With mail-in voting and eventually online voting becoming the new standard, doesn't this effectively bypass a physical voter ID? Here in CA each ballot has a barcode that matches the ballot to the voter, and the ballot can be tracked all the way through when it is accepted. Seems like a secure way of processing votes and for the life of me cannot comprehend how anyone would commit large scale fraud without it shooting up thousands of red flags and being uncovered.
3. I thought Republicans were all about states deciding what is best for them and leaving the federal government out of it? I see nothing wrong with states allowing non-citizens to vote especially if they make up a significant portion of the state.
4. I'm totally fine with this, but I'd imagine it would require a lot more time put in by volunteer poll workers. Seems like just making Election Day a national holiday would be more efficient.
Here's the bigger issue. A lot of Dem states have more restrictive voting rules than places the libs are complaining about like Georgia. NY and Delaware specifically come to mind. In fact, NY'ers just voted down proposals that would have relaxed voting rules. It's kind of hypocritical for Biden to be out there complaining about places like Georgia when his own home state has more restrictive voting rules I hate to link to an obviously biased conservative site but here is an article that details this:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/04/democrats-voting-rights-contradiction/618599/
Here is one on NY'ers rejecting two voting related ballot proposals:
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/11/ballot-proposals-on-redistricting-voting-fail-in-new-york.html
Seems like there are a lot of racists in the blue states.
In order to vote in a federal or state election one must be a US citizen. Local elections may allow non-citizens.3. Are we talking about local elections or general elections. When someone is voting for a HOR, Senate or President, no, I don't want non-citizens voting on the direction the United States should move in. If you're talking about the State level, maybe I could be persuaded since I don't really care about what happens in North Dakota.
Can't be done now. Anything in the GA law has been painted as Jim Crow racist. I don't know how anything can be compromised on as everything in that bill has been painted one monolithic color.4. Increased access to vote. Something like GA did, open up voting a couple weeks before the election with times available on weekends so people with jobs don't have to stand in line and vote then go to work.
BTW, in Alabama you can call and they will send out a van to get you an ID, free of charge. Anywhere in the state.1. Voter ID requirements. 80%+ of people polled want voter ID. If there is an issue with low-income voters obtaining IDs, make obtaining the ID easier and even free. Don't do away with the ID requirements.
I'll stick my neck out and say that this is a horrible idea. I worry a lot about foreign actors meddling directly here - we have proof of lots of meddling already. No need to make this easy for them. Stick to pen and paper for physical verification.2. With mail-in voting and eventually online voting becoming the new standard, doesn't this effectively bypass a physical voter ID? Here in CA each ballot has a barcode that matches the ballot to the voter, and the ballot can be tracked all the way through when it is accepted. Seems like a secure way of processing votes and for the life of me cannot comprehend how anyone would commit large scale fraud without it shooting up thousands of red flags and being uncovered.
Eight pages in and still absolutely nothing in this thread about how this bill affects voters' "rights."
Great marketing and faux-crisis creation by the Democrats, though.
Can't be done now. Anything in the GA law has been painted as Jim Crow racist. I don't know how anything can be compromised on as everything in that bill has been painted one monolithic color.
Can you link to this?Yeah, it really is a shame that they painted it as Jim Crow simply because it was passed by Republicans without actually looking at how much more access the laws gave to people of Georgia. When you fine tooth comb the laws, it will have the effect of allowing MORE Georgians access to the polls. But we're in the day and age of if you don't like something just call it racists and you can get large corporations to back you because of white guilt. Since Biden was elected however, there seems to be a shift in attitude toward people who use this tactic. More and more companies and individuals are fighting back from pressure due to the race card and cancel culture.
https://www.kut.org/politics/2022-01-18/texas-says-supply-chain-issues-have-limited-the-number-of-voter-registration-forms-it-can-give-out
1. Sorry you can only register with paper registrations.
2. We don't have enough paper regiastations because reasons.
3. Sucks for you losers! Lolz! Hold a bake sale or something.
Can you link to this?
How was asking for a link trolling? Heritage group?https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/the-truth-about-georgias-voting-law
Quite frankly, I know you're trolling here, but whatever here is a link. I would tell you, to simply read the actual law and think about the application of those laws compared to what the law was previously instead of listening to the partisan "Jim Crow" hit pieces that were put out when the law was passed.
How was asking for a link trolling? Heritage group?
Its funny, if Trump wins 2020, NONE of these laws happen. But since he lost, even though the election was the most secure ever, lets fix what ain't broken.
Let me do more research and I''l get back ---Typical from these boards. Instead of arguing content, people attack the source. Which part of the article do you not agree with? What part of the law would you say is Jim Crow-esque and why? This is how you debate a topic. You don't ask for a link and then dismiss based on the source.
As the third week of early voting for Georgia’s 2022 primary election continues, Georgia voters are turning out in record numbers across the state. Through Wednesday, May 19th, over 565,000 people have early voted in Georgia—a 189% increase from the same point in the early voting period in the 2018 primary election and a 153% increase in the same point in the early voting period in the 2020 primary election. Georgia has had record early voting turnout since the first day of early voting this year, surging to nearly three times the number on the first day of primary voting in 2018 and double that of 2020, and has continued on that path since.
So we are starting to see the effects of the new Georgia voting laws, you all remember, the return to "Jim Crow" we were told the laws were.
https://sos.ga.gov/news/record-early-voting-turnout-continues-4#:~:text=May 19th%2C 2022&text=Through Wednesday%2C May 19th%2C over,in the 2020 primary election.
Stacy Abrams when making the "Jim Crow" comment apparently didn't understand the effect the new laws would have and obviously doesn't understand her own state's voter habits. She just wanted a sound bite to get her name out there. A bunch of large businesses bit on her comments (looking at you MLB) out of white guilt instead of taking the time to understand the law.
Imagine ? Talk about egg on faceDon't forget MLB pulled the All Star Game out of Atlanta over this too.
Or maybe she knew exactly what she was doing. If you believe the other guys are trying to hold down the Black vote, the best counter is to use that prospect to fuel Black turnout.So we are starting to see the effects of the new Georgia voting laws, you all remember, the return to "Jim Crow" we were told the laws were.
https://sos.ga.gov/news/record-early-voting-turnout-continues-4#:~:text=May 19th%2C 2022&text=Through Wednesday%2C May 19th%2C over,in the 2020 primary election.
Stacy Abrams when making the "Jim Crow" comment apparently didn't understand the effect the new laws would have and obviously doesn't understand her own state's voter habits. She just wanted a sound bite to get her name out there. A bunch of large businesses bit on her comments (looking at you MLB) out of white guilt instead of taking the time to understand the law.
I wouldnt give her that much credit.Or maybe she knew exactly what she was doing. If you believe the other guys are trying to hold down the Black vote, the best counter is to use that prospect to fuel Black turnout.
Something happened during the Trump years, where both sides decided to start repeating the same talking points over and over again with nearly total indifference to whether they fit the actual facts. Georgia's election laws were completely fine, but it didn't matter. Any time a Republican anywhere makes any change to any election law, there's only one possible script that Democrats can read from, and it's one that involves white cops turning firehoses on black people or something similarly over-the-top. I remember arguing about this at the time, and it was kind of hard to believe how people were freaking out over things like the expansion of mail-in voting, like they were reacting to some opposite version of the law in question passed in some bizarro alternate universe.Ha Ha. Forgot about Biden saying this voting bill "makes Jim Crow look like Jim Eagle".
Or maybe she knew exactly what she was doing. If you believe the other guys are trying to hold down the Black vote, the best counter is to use that prospect to fuel Black turnout.
I can’t remember for sure but weren’t the originally proposed Georgia voting laws more onerous than the ones that actually passed?Something happened during the Trump years, where both sides decided to start repeating the same talking points over and over again with nearly total indifference to whether they fit the actual facts. Georgia's election laws were completely fine, but it didn't matter. Any time a Republican anywhere makes any change to any election law, there's only one possible script that Democrats can read from, and it's one that involves white cops turning firehoses on black people or something similarly over-the-top. I remember arguing about this at the time, and it was kind of hard to believe how people were freaking out over things like the expansion of mail-in voting, like they were reacting to some opposite version of the law in question passed in some bizarro alternate universe.
We all expect a certain amount of spin from politicians, but this was so totally divorced from reality that its hard to believe anyone took it seriously. But the activist base and the media really ate it up, and they even got MLB to fall for it somehow.
This sort of indifference to truth is one of the things I most hated about Trump, and I assumed Biden wouldn't go this route. Obviously I was wrong about that.
Something happened during the Trump years, where both sides decided to start repeating the same talking points over and over again with nearly total indifference to whether they fit the actual facts. Georgia's election laws were completely fine, but it didn't matter. Any time a Republican anywhere makes any change to any election law, there's only one possible script that Democrats can read from, and it's one that involves white cops turning firehoses on black people or something similarly over-the-top. I remember arguing about this at the time, and it was kind of hard to believe how people were freaking out over things like the expansion of mail-in voting, like they were reacting to some opposite version of the law in question passed in some bizarro alternate universe.
We all expect a certain amount of spin from politicians, but this was so totally divorced from reality that its hard to believe anyone took it seriously. But the activist base and the media really ate it up, and they even got MLB to fall for it somehow.
This sort of indifference to truth is one of the things I most hated about Trump, and I assumed Biden wouldn't go this route. Obviously I was wrong about that.
ignatiusjreilly said:Or maybe she knew exactly what she was doing. If you believe the other guys are trying to hold down the Black vote, the best counter is to use that prospect to fuel Black turnout.
How is she going to increase voter turnout amongst a demographic that I've been told is incapable of getting an I.D. card or finding their way to a polling place?
Because you were never told this. And its really ridiculous that people keep making such claims.How is she going to increase voter turnout amongst a demographic that I've been told is incapable of getting an I.D. card or finding their way to a polling place?
FairWarning said:I wouldnt give her that much credit.
It makes perfect sense. Assume for the moment that it doesn't actually matter whether these laws suppress Black turnout. Either way, it makes sense for her to use them in her messaging to historically low-turnout voters: "They wouldn't be trying so hard to suppress your vote if they weren't scared of you voting." Whether you think that's cynical manipulation or the best counter to efforts to restrict the franchise, it's a very effective message.Snotbubbles said:That doesn't make logical sense. If simple motivation can create a large Black voter turnout, then no voting law could ever be written to hold down the Black vote since it's just a matter of motivation on an individual. Something that I actually agree with, that voting is nothing more than a motivational issue. But I think you give Abrams too much credit. She is of the ilk of the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the world, she tries to use racism to further her own personal position even when racism doesn't exist. She's the worst kind of politician because she only cares about her own standing.
It makes perfect sense. Assume for the moment that it doesn't actually matter whether these laws suppress Black turnout. Either way, it makes sense for her to use them in her messaging to historically low-turnout voters: "They wouldn't be trying so hard to suppress your vote if they weren't scared of you voting." Whether you think that's cynical manipulation or the best counter to efforts to restrict the franchise, it's a very effective message.
But by all means, please continue to underestimate Stacy Abrams and view her as a Jackson/Sharpton-style racial hustler. Don't spend any time thinking about the fact that she came up with a long-range plan to flip Georgia blue and then spent a full decade methodically executing it, finally succeeding in 2020. That was pure luck; Dems won all those races in spite of her. Pay no attention to the woman behind the curtain.
Old Crow distilled by Jim Beam. And it’s trash.My buddy is a bourbon drinker. I think he has a bottle of Jim Crow Bourbon. Is that racist?