CDZ Please someone opposed to Georgia voter bill

[IM2]

I have a few reasons.

I don't think it's a good idea to let the State remove any local election official, for any or no reason, which this bill does. I think that opens the door for *actual* shenanigans by letting whichever party currently has the state power prevent change by simply nullifying a bunch of votes from any county that voted against them.

The bill shortens the time and makes it tougher to get absentee ballots, prohibits the state from sending applications to every voter, and places added restrictions on provisional ballots. All of these will serve to reduce the amount of people who can vote rather than expand it. It does expand weekend early-voting hours statewide, but in overcrowded areas (that is, cities) that is more than offset because it limits drop boxes to 1 per 100,000 voters, which disproportionately makes it tougher on city folk, and it gets ride of the two mobile vote bus things they had for overcrowded spots. The food and water thing, even if its intent was to prevent influencers, has the predictable effect of encouraging people to give up and go home.

They passed the law to guard against something that didn't happen, but there is some validity in assuring your people in a perception-is-reality kind of way that it won't happen in the future, so fair enough. Some things I left out actually help do that. These things, though, are limiting participation much more than they are expanding or securing it, and opening the door for future fraud much more than preventing it. So I think it's a bad law.

As for the second question, it's true that this will affect more Black and minority voters than white folks, but to use that hyperbole diminishes how truly awful Jim Crow really was. On the other hand, I'm not about to tell Black people that they can't call it that; I just personally wouldn't draw that line.

Being that I am black, I will say that voting restrictions were part of jim crow and the inability to vote made the rest of jim crow possible. But that is the only disagreement I have with what you said.

 

[DudleySmith]

Someone opposed to the Georgia law be specific and provide me with the following

1) what EXACTLY are you opposed to in the bill?

2) what EXACTLY in the bill is like Jim Crow laws?

One provision to my understanding is the food and drink one which in my opinion could be solved if the districts make sure the lines are moving and not long.

The only other one is the voter ID but Democrats can get around that by helping all those that need one get one so that during the next election they can vote someone in to repeal the law...

Those are the only two things I can see what they have any issue with...

They can send vans around to hire the homeless and take them to the polls, but they can't be bothered to take them down to get an ID.

It doesn't cost money to vote.

lol like we all don't know how gangs like ACORN operate every election. politicians need lots of soft money for a reason, and it ain't for donuts and haircuts.

 

[DudleySmith]

I have a few reasons.

I don't think it's a good idea to let the State remove any local election official, for any or no reason, which this bill does. I think that opens the door for *actual* shenanigans by letting whichever party currently has the state power prevent change by simply nullifying a bunch of votes from any county that voted against them.

The bill shortens the time and makes it tougher to get absentee ballots, prohibits the state from sending applications to every voter, and places added restrictions on provisional ballots. All of these will serve to reduce the amount of people who can vote rather than expand it. It does expand weekend early-voting hours statewide, but in overcrowded areas (that is, cities) that is more than offset because it limits drop boxes to 1 per 100,000 voters, which disproportionately makes it tougher on city folk, and it gets ride of the two mobile vote bus things they had for overcrowded spots. The food and water thing, even if its intent was to prevent influencers, has the predictable effect of encouraging people to give up and go home.

They passed the law to guard against something that didn't happen, but there is some validity in assuring your people in a perception-is-reality kind of way that it won't happen in the future, so fair enough. Some things I left out actually help do that. These things, though, are limiting participation much more than they are expanding or securing it, and opening the door for future fraud much more than preventing it. So I think it's a bad law.

As for the second question, it's true that this will affect more Black and minority voters than white folks, but to use that hyperbole diminishes how truly awful Jim Crow really was. On the other hand, I'm not about to tell Black people that they can't call it that; I just personally wouldn't draw that line.

Being that I am black, I will say that voting restrictions were part of jim crow and the inability to vote made the rest of jim crow possible. But that is the only disagreement I have with what you said.

So you think back people are too stupid to know how to get an ID. People that stupid will vote for the same candidates you vote for, being your reason, right? That's your argument, but it's not racist when you claim it, right? If it were known they would vote for TRump, you would be sniveling no end over keeping them out of the polls.