Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter joffer
- Start date
The Commish
Footballguy
I mean, if FLORIDA can figure it out and have secure elections, I think just about anybody can.
And I'll just point out that the "witchcraft" mentioned in that article isn't over the sig verification, it's over the lack of ability to get a notification out to the voter that there is a problem.
The Commish
Footballguy
All you need for mail-in voting:
1. Privacy in terms of voter identification in the request and the ballot.
2. Ballot verification process.
3. Communication path to alert the user of a problem.
4. Place the voter can go to verify their vote had been counted.
That's it...not rocket science.
1. Privacy in terms of voter identification in the request and the ballot.
2. Ballot verification process.
3. Communication path to alert the user of a problem.
4. Place the voter can go to verify their vote had been counted.
That's it...not rocket science.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
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.
The Commish
Footballguy
Absolutely no reason whatsoever for them NOT to have kiosks at voting places that people can go to.The Z Machine said:
Stealthycat
Footballguy
zoonation said:
love being called ignorant - thank you !
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/10/signature-matching-is-the-phrenology-of-elections/616790/
“At the end of the day, officials are not trained in how to conduct signature-match verification,” Kristen Clarke, the president of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, says. “They use procedures that would not stand up in a court of law.”
How that is done, like the rest of the American election system, varies wildly from state to state and even from county to county. Some jurisdictions use the signature on a voter-registration form or a ballot request or a driver’s license. A software program might make the first cut, or humans might conduct the whole process. Examiners might have a single autograph with which to compare, or dozens. Many people use more than one name, and might use the wrong signature on their ballot. The singer Lady Gaga tweeted a timely reminder on Sunday: “When I sign legal documents, I repeat Stefani Germanotta over+over quietly in my head so I don’t accidentally sign as Lady Gaga,” she wrote, referring to her birth name.
Regardless of the overall rejection rates, it’s a safe bet whose ballots will be rejected most: those of the youngest voters, the oldest voters, disabled voters, and voters of color. The first three of these are relatively easily explained. As schools phase handwriting instruction out of their curriculum, young people no longer learn cursive. They are less likely to have consistent, well-practiced signatures, and as a result, are less likely to have two signatures from different occasions match. Over time, their handwriting matures too. Freda Levenson, the legal director of the ACLU of Ohio, told me about a voter who had registered with a girlish signature when she was in high school. By the time she tried casting an absentee ballot in her 30s, “she in effect had to forge her own signature to make it match.” Similarly, older voters’ handwriting is sometimes in decline. Voters who suffer from illnesses such as stroke may lose the ability to sign the way they once did. But why so many voters of color see their ballots rejected is not well understood.
During her years working as an election administrator in Maricopa County, Arizona, Patrick said she never encountered a voter whose signature had been rejected who said their name had been forged.
“They would say, ‘I had my hand in a cast,’ ‘I was writing with my left hand,’ ‘I’d recently suffered a stroke,’ ‘I was signing on top of the mailbox or my dashboard,’” she said. “Things like that confirm the legitimacy of the signature. Those are all things you learn and you know when you make that contact.”
add to the above ... https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/11/10/most-mail-and-provisional-ballots-got-counted-in-past-u-s-elections-but-many-did-not/
A record number of votes – about 65 million – were cast via mail ballot (also called absentee voting) in the 2020 general election, and the outcome of the presidential race in several key states came down to them.
n the 2016 general election, voters submitted nearly 33.5 million mail ballots, but more than 400,000 (1.2% of the total) weren’t counted
400,000 in 2016 .... 400,000 votes .... I thought every vote counted ? In 2020, voters cast 70,550,699 absentee/mail-in ballots in the general election. Of these, 560,177 (0.8%) of which were rejected.
Frankly, I think the next presidential election may result in the most fraud. When people think they have been cheated, they cheat. So I can see a lot of the dregs of the GOP taking fraudulent actions.
It's already happened where fraudulent electors sent in forms stating Trump won their state
It's already happened where fraudulent electors sent in forms stating Trump won their state
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
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.
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.
sho nuff
Footballguy
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.
Voting should be easy for all citizens...
Stoneworker
Footballguy
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.
Great marketing and faux-crisis creation by the Democrats, though.
Dickies
Footballguy
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.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
1. You currently don't need identification to vote. You simply need to sign an affidavit that you are who you say you are and you are given a voter ID number. When you go to vote, you don't need photo identification, just the voter ID number. Your issue with getting the ID is the real problem. That's what needs to fixed (as I said in my initial post).
2. With mail-in you are trying to verify that the person attached to the vote is the person who actually voted. Thus signature verification is a simple solution.
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.
Dickies
Footballguy
In order to vote in a federal or state election one must be a US citizen. Local elections may allow non-citizens.
Sand
Footballguy
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.
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.
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.
Of all the bad ideas out there with regards to voting, this one is the worst.
Last edited by a moderator:
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
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.
Jackstraw
Footballguy
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.
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.
Stoneworker
Footballguy
In responding to Trump's "Big Lie," Democrats and many in the media are doing something remarkably similar by claiming these state laws are an effort to steal the coming elections - claims that might fuel anger and violence similar to that seen after the 2020 election.
Biden's embrace of rage politics has fueled the hysteria surrounding these laws.
What is most notable about the relentless coverage of the effort to "steal" the election is the lack of specifics. Indeed, when President Biden has attempted to give specifics, he has received "Pinocchios" from Washington Post fact-checkers. He falsely and repeatedly claimed, for example, that the Georgia law (which he described as "Jim Crow on steroids") sought to reduce hours to vote. The election law actually does the opposite: It guaranteed that, at a minimum, polls would remain open for a full workday while allowing extended hours commonly used on Election Day.
Requiring voter identification has been repeatedly cited as clear evidence of an effort to steal the election. However, 80 percent of the public supports voter identification rules. The courts have overwhelmingly upheld these rules as constitutional.
What is most interesting is how this claim is being amplified by Biden and others despite every indication that the public isn't buying it, with election reforms barely registering on some polls as a major concern for voters.
There are good-faith arguments over issues like voter identification and early voting. There are also good provisions in the election bill that should be adopted by states. Yet even the Atlantic and some CNN hosts have noted that some blue states have even stricter rules (including Biden's own state of Delaware), but President Biden is not claiming that Democrats there are trying to steal elections.
The fact is that democracy is protected by our courts - and by a host of laws protecting the right to vote and banning discrimination against minority voters.
The Democrats' "Big Lie" may not be convincing the public, but it is clearly convincing the most extreme parts of their party.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-other-big-lie-how-biden-and-democrats-fuel-doubts-about-the-2024-election/ar-AASWbdL?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBnbfcL
Biden's embrace of rage politics has fueled the hysteria surrounding these laws.
What is most notable about the relentless coverage of the effort to "steal" the election is the lack of specifics. Indeed, when President Biden has attempted to give specifics, he has received "Pinocchios" from Washington Post fact-checkers. He falsely and repeatedly claimed, for example, that the Georgia law (which he described as "Jim Crow on steroids") sought to reduce hours to vote. The election law actually does the opposite: It guaranteed that, at a minimum, polls would remain open for a full workday while allowing extended hours commonly used on Election Day.
Requiring voter identification has been repeatedly cited as clear evidence of an effort to steal the election. However, 80 percent of the public supports voter identification rules. The courts have overwhelmingly upheld these rules as constitutional.
What is most interesting is how this claim is being amplified by Biden and others despite every indication that the public isn't buying it, with election reforms barely registering on some polls as a major concern for voters.
There are good-faith arguments over issues like voter identification and early voting. There are also good provisions in the election bill that should be adopted by states. Yet even the Atlantic and some CNN hosts have noted that some blue states have even stricter rules (including Biden's own state of Delaware), but President Biden is not claiming that Democrats there are trying to steal elections.
The fact is that democracy is protected by our courts - and by a host of laws protecting the right to vote and banning discrimination against minority voters.
The Democrats' "Big Lie" may not be convincing the public, but it is clearly convincing the most extreme parts of their party.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-other-big-lie-how-biden-and-democrats-fuel-doubts-about-the-2024-election/ar-AASWbdL?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBnbfcL
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
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.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
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.
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.
Summer Wheat
Footballguy
My buddy is a bourbon drinker. I think he has a bottle of Jim Crow Bourbon. Is that racist?
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
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.
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.
Clearly Stacy Abrams' initiative to educate POC on how to obtain I.D. cards has worked.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Ha Ha. Forgot about Biden saying this voting bill "makes Jim Crow look like Jim Eagle".
Shula-holic
Footballguy
Don't forget MLB pulled the All Star Game out of Atlanta over this too.
Last edited by a moderator:
ZADO
Footballguy
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
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.
FairWarning
Footballguy
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
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.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
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.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
I can’t remember for sure but weren’t the originally proposed Georgia voting laws more onerous than the ones that actually passed?
If my memory is right, it feels like this law fits the same pattern as the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law in Florida:
1. Republicans put forth a bill that is motivated by what Democrats would view as an improper purpose (suppressing voting, being anti-LGBT).
2. Dems freak
3. Republicans then water down the bill to pass something so they can at least say they did something to achieve the “improper purpose.”
4. Dems continue to freak because they are still mostly thinking of the original bill plus even the watered down version was still passed for a “bad” reason (according to Dems).
5. Republicans are like “Dems are being irrational this law is totally not a big deal.”
ETA: I just looked at Wikipedia and I think I made this all up, please disregard.
Last edited by a moderator:
Boston
Footballguy
Dead-on...today's political/activist class go right from 0-100mph on EVERY SINGLE ISSUE...it is getting so old...whether you are right or left you are not going to get everything you want but it seems some are incapable of dealing with that and anything that they don't get means "democracy is dying" or some vast over-reaction like that...in this case it was the talking point of Jim Crow 2.0 which as you can now see is pretty comical but really isn't because it is serious accusation that should not be thrown out on a whim...we have entered the boy who cried wolf stage of our country and it is getting very tiresome.
Last edited by a moderator:
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Good thing in Georgia, when you complete your voter registration form if you don't have a state issued ID or social security card, if you sign the attestation on the form the state will issue you a voter ID card to be used when you vote.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Because you were never told this. And its really ridiculous that people keep making such claims.
What you have been told and shown by data...is that the demographich is less likely to have ID, and its harder for them to get one. That happens due to missing historic documents...offices being limited in certain parts of cities (or hours limited more than in other places making it harder for some)...and yes transportation for certain demographics as well. That does not mean people are incapable of doing it...or are too dumb to figure it out...or the list of other insulting things some try to push out there. Its just that things have been made more difficult for some people (and often its been done deliberately to limit their access to the right to vote).
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
FairWarning said:
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:
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.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Huh? The Republicans early voting turnout has surpassed the early voter turnout from the 2020 general election. They've received almost 125,000 more early votes than Democrats. It's not some Democratic motivational tool that Abrams is playing chess while others are playing checkers. It's a result of the new laws.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Abrams doubles down, on the record voter turnout in 2022 she says "it's correlation without causation". Just take the L and admit you're wrong.
Similar threads
