Raffensperger blasts proposed rule requiring hand count of ballots at Georgia polling places
Raffensperger blasts proposed rule requiring hand count of ballots at Georgia polling places
Georgia's secretary of state spoke against election rule changes pending before the State Election Board, rejecting a proposal to hand count ballots.
cross-posted from: https://yall.theatl.social/post/3474840
From WABE Politics News:
Georgia’s secretary of state on Thursday came out against election rule changes pending before the State Election Board, specifically rejecting a proposal to count ballots by hand at polling places […]
Sharlene Alexander, a member of the Fayette County Board of Elections and Voter Registration, submitted the proposal to have three poll workers hand count ballots, sorting them into stacks of 50 ballots until all have been counted and the three workers have arrived at the same total. If that number doesn’t match those recorded on the voter check-in system, the electronic voting machines and the scanner recap forms, the poll manager is to determine the reason for the inconsistency and, if possible, correct it.
We're starting to see the tactics the MAGA fascists will be using to try to delay the reporting of results and/or manufacture disputes, in order to punt the assignment of GA's electoral votes to the corrupt SCOTUS and thwart the will of the voters. With this rule change, it would only take a few MAGA poll workers in a few key precincts to keep "accidentally" miscounting and make that happen.
37Then looks like we'll have to win in more states then. I don't like polls except for sentiment, but it's all building up in Harris' favor right now.
8They've been doing this type of shit for years.
Legit three years ago, I was at the local property records office and there was some old bag conservative in there with no job cross-referencing the voter rolls with the land records, just looking for people who might not be registered at the correct address, or who have recently moved but haven't reregistered in a new town yet, to challenge their names on the roll.
On the other side of the coin, to the Republicans in the state legislature keep trying to raise a bill that's filled with all these loaded terms about transparency and the right to petition and open government, and what the law does is says that at any public meeting, members of the public have a right to be heard up to fifteen minutes. Under the current law, there is only a right to be heard at one or two public meetings on a subject and limited to three minutes. Like, I'm not sure exactly how the law is written now, but it's something like public comment is only required when the item is added to the public agenda for public discussion/hearing and before it's voted on. The new law would give numbers of the public the right to speak at any public meeting in which the topic is discussed.
It's like, the government has work to do, and this is a way to jam up their work by giving every whack job MAGA dumbass 15 minutes to waste at very meeting. It's a very obvious attempt to stop the government from working.
These aren't even new tactics.
1Legit three years ago, I was at the local property records office and there was some old bag conservative in there with no job cross-referencing the voter rolls with the land records, just looking for people who might not be registered at the correct address, or who have recently moved but haven’t reregistered in a new town yet, to challenge their names on the roll.
That's a different tactic than what is being discussed in this article. It is happening -- and what's worse, they've made it easier/automated it -- but we need to be figuring out countermeasures for this problem, not distracting ourselves by making everything about the other thing.
On the other side of the coin, to the Republicans in the state legislature keep trying to raise a bill that’s filled with all these loaded terms about transparency and the right to petition and open government, and what the law does is says that at any public meeting, members of the public have a right to be heard up to fifteen minutes. Under the current law, there is only a right to be heard at one or two public meetings on a subject and limited to three minutes. Like, I’m not sure exactly how the law is written now, but it’s something like public comment is only required when the item is added to the public agenda for public discussion/hearing and before it’s voted on. The new law would give numbers of the public the right to speak at any public meeting in which the topic is discussed.
Public comment at meetings is good, actually. This is why you earned my downvote.
These aren’t even new tactics.
To be clear: the tactic that this article is about is new.
2
There are going to be major shenanigans in November. I fear Trump loyalists have had too much time to prepare this time and gotten too emboldened. I love riding the high of the current wave of rare optimism, but it just feels like there is no chance Harris just wins, gets certified and sworn in and that's that, right? Either Trump wins legit, or they manage to steal the election.
I really hope I'm wrong.
17It won't be a steal, it will be an insurrection and civil war.
7it will be an insurrection and civil war.
I'm terrified that that might be the best-case scenario. Right now, it's looking like non-fascists are so complacent and in denial they might let the MAGAs get away with coronating a dictator without even a fight.
Frankly, there ought to be hundreds of thousands of people in downtown Atlanta right now protesting the blatant corruption of the state elections board, but there aren't.
2
With the recent Supreme Court ruling, Biden can just say no. He can order the military to do whatever is necessary to secure democracy.
A coup and a counter-coup might not look much different. That certainly is a problem. I expect we'll do our best to avoid it, but we'll do what's needed if it comes down to Kamala getting 270 electoral votes denied only by Trumpers refusal to certify.
Some supporters of the GOP, notably some specific foreign ones, are fine with that. They'd rather see Trump in office, but they'll be happy with anything that destabilizes the US while making their own elections seem better.
If Kamala loses the election legitimately, well, we just lose. Dem leadership will abide by the results of a reasonably fair election.
4
Magats want battleground states to be a mess, but the SoS in GA is responsible for elections and Brad prolly wants to keep his job.
8Raffensperger spoke against it, but he's not the one who gets to decide -- the MAGA-controlled elections board does.
6
WABE - NPR - Atlanta - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for WABE - NPR - Atlanta:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
-3