NFT- MLB has moved All Star Game out of Atlanta

[Sem]

It's been widely studied and reported that the number of documented cases of fraudulent voting over the past several years in both state and federal elections is infinitesimally small. These new laws, which among other things limit the amount of polling places and voting times, will in all likelihood make it more difficult, not easier, to vote and especially so for those living in higher density population areas, (which as we all know traditionally tend to vote Democrat btw). Due to this law will there be eligible voters less likely to vote than before these laws were enacted? I would say yes, and I'm not sure how one could argue otherwise. Based on what we know about past elections might that number be more than the number of fraudulent votes cast? Again I would say a resounding yes!! As a result when more eligible voters are kept from voting than the number of fraudulent votes cast this amounts to the "cure being worse than the disease." How does this not go against the very core of our democracy? How is this not completely unamerican??? That there are those attempting to justify this is beyond shameful.

[Painter]

Painter would that also apply to people who feel the law is justified and will prevent future fraud or is it limited to one side of an argument.

People can feel anyway they like. No one is suggesting otherwise. Rather, one would hope that their conclusion would be open-minded and based on fact.

As there has not been the slightest evidence of voting fraud in the recent election based on numerous investigations by the DOJ, by the Brennan Center, and by various court's dismissal of 50 lawsuits brought by Trump and his allies, it is hard to imagine anyone seeing such laws and changes in procedure as anything like legitimate. I don't known what it might take to convince someone, who is actually seeking the truth, of the pernicious nature of these recent actions, but I suggest that he or she consider that then Attorney General, Bill Barr declared last December that the Justice Department found no evidence of voter fraud which might have changed the outcome of the election, and in that he flatly disputed Trump's baseless claims.

Personally, I find it astounding that we have been made such fools of for as long as we have. But I guess it does clearly prove that  con men don't have to be smart if their victims are dumb enough.

Cheers!

[Slugsy-Narrows]

All you have to do is ask why. Why did Georgia do this? Why is Arizona trying to do this? And other states? There is no honest answer. There is no reason to make it harder to vote. There was no voter fraud in 2020. And there has been very little for decades. No, this is being done because of a lie created and spread by a man who could not accept losing. In this country and democracies, majorities usually rule. The Republican party knows it has lost that majority and is continuing to lose it not by voter fraud, but by bad policies. Forget the water line issue. That, as PSU said, is a distraction. It's a attempt to grab power when power has been lost.

Because loopholes were found In a system and were exploited. Close the loopholes to ensue a fair election for all regardless of party or views.

Had it been done in reverse the same things would be happening. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bldevil]

It is interesting to view this thread late-in-the-game.  Like most political discussions it seems very long in opinions and very short in facts.  How about investigate the facts first, then debate the opinions?

What precisely is in the new law?  Some say the new law is an improvement, some say it makes things worse.  The presence and/or prevalence of voter fraud in recent elections, or not, is irrelevant to whether the new law is an improvement, or not.  In the same vein, I don't care if traffic accidents have gone up or down recently in my neighborhood. If there is a new law to address that issue, and it's good/bad on its own merits, then I will be for/against it.

So is the following quote that I read today true? Or not?
"
On Election Day in Georgia, anyone in line by 7 p.m. gets a ballot. The new law requires an extra Saturday of voting, while specifying early voting hours: The minimum is 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., but counties may run 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. In metro areas,

[Slugsy-Narrows]

It is interesting to view this thread late-in-the-game.  Like most political discussions it seems very long in opinions and very short in facts.  How about investigate the facts first, then debate the opinions?

What precisely is in the new law?  Some say the new law is an improvement, some say it makes things worse.  The presence and/or prevalence of voter fraud in recent elections, or not, is irrelevant to whether the new law is an improvement, or not.  In the same vein, I don't care if traffic accidents have gone up or down recently in my neighborhood. If there is a new law to address that issue, and it's good/bad on its own merits, then I will be for/against it.

So is the following quote that I read today true? Or not?
"
On Election Day in Georgia, anyone in line by 7 p.m. gets a ballot. The new law requires an extra Saturday of voting, while specifying early voting hours: The minimum is 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., but counties may run 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. In metro areas,

[nb587]

The bill is more than 90 pages so parsing it down to a few bullet points, on either side, is not all that useful.  What i think is useful is understanding the motivation of an administration in Georgia that felt the need to make these kind of changes.  We just had an election that drastically changed the representation of the State at least in the Senate.  By all accounts, including those certified by conservative Republicans responsible for governance with regard to the election,  there were no instances of fraud that mattered and the election was completely honest.  So, the Republican legislature decided to remove authorities of future elections from these officials and keep the power to determine outcomes.

One can quibble about the fine points of the bill but its pretty clear to me that the reason for rushing these changes has little to do with election integrity and much to do with stacking the deck.

[Painter]

Glad you think so.  It would seem MANY others disagree.

And adding a voter ID to help ensure things is basic common sense that can only help to further secure and prove a fair election.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Indeed. And it doesn't speak well for them. While that's their problem, it also has thus become the Country's problem perfectly illustrated by the mock motive of this latest sham.

"Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not." : : "There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know.

Cheers!

[Slugsy-Narrows]

Indeed. And it doesn't speak well for them. While that's their problem, it also has thus become the Country's problem perfectly illustrated by the mock motive of this latest sham.

"Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not." : : "There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know.

Cheers!

Doesn

[PSUBeirut]

Nice birdwalk there slugs but the issue is voter fraud. Does it exist in such a fashion as it requires new legislation to fix?  The answer is simply no.

These lawmakers are actually quite smart. They are using people dumb enough to believe the big lie that the last election was stolen through fraud in order to establish laws that allow them to keep control. This is despicable and un American.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Painter]

Nice birdwalk there slugs but the issue is voter fraud. Does it exist in such a fashion as it requires new legislation to fix?  The answer is simply no.

These lawmakers are actually quite smart. They are using people dumb enough to believe the big lie that the last election was stolen through fraud in order to establish laws that allow them to keep control. This is despicable and un American.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Exactly! You nailed it. They will fabricate and obfuscate, which all they can do, but the truth is plain and simple to see unless its inconvenient to one's agenda which all too often includes racism and/or xenophobia, and/or religious bigoty and/or dog whistling the delusional.

Cheers!

[Slugsy-Narrows]

Ha!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[H-Town G-Fan]

For those still spouting the voter fraud argument, you need to understand that it was never a real position and the attorneys who were touting it in multiple states have had to retract their statements in an effort to protect themselves. Sidney Powell, Trump's attorney, had to declare in briefing - and I quote - "reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact but view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process." (And please understand that statements in pleadings carry great weight not only in that particular case but across the board because attorneys can be held to those statements regardless of where they were made since they have a duty not just to their client but to the law and the courts themselves.) The "statements" referenced therein are the allegations of widespread (indeed even non-widespread, just marginally identifiable) voter fraud. And those claims which "awaited testing" were thrown out because the testing revealed the claims were wholly un-meritorious. Long story short: there was no there there.

To break it down even further: in this election cycle, there has not been a cognizable legal argument that voter fraud affected this election that has survived the most basic of scrutiny. If you believe the contrary, you're engaging in a conspiracy theory. You're just wrong. Republican and democratic judges alike have rejected these spurious cases.

Georgia's recent law has nothing to do with protecting elections. If its election was compromised, that would have been apparent given the microscope it was under. No, the recent laws are about inconveniencing people in the hope that they forego their constitutional rights. Its despicable. No American should welcome such a blatant effort to curtail citizens' constitutional rights.

[GiantsRevival2]

I

[MightyGiants]

I

[MightyGiants]

Exactly!  Give out food and drinks at an election should be illegal.  It