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 […]

35 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Then 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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
  1. As a Georgian, I’d like to not be disenfranchised, thank you very much!

  2. They’re going to be pulling this shit, or similar, in all the other states too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That’s why EVERYONE needs to be checking their voting status between now and November.

permalink
report
parent
reply

They’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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

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.

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.

See also: https://atlantadailyworld.com/2023/05/17/hundreds-of-atlantans-oppose-cop-city-in-record-breaking-7-hour-public-comment/

These aren’t even new tactics.

To be clear: the tactic that this article is about is new.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Yeah public comment is good. Opening up every single public meeting for an unlimited period of question and answer which is what this bill I was talking about proposed, is intentional sabotage of government. There is limited time for public comment at public meetings, The amount of time allowed should absolutely not be increased fivefold and allowed to go on until there is no one left that wants to speak. It would ruin the government’s ability to function.

The article you linked says right on it that those 288 people had to sign up in advance to speak. The bill I am talking about would allow anyone to show up and be able to speak at any hearing, not just hearings held for the purpose of public testimony, but any hearing on which the subject matter is discussed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

It won’t be a steal, it will be an insurrection and civil war.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

it 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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’m not sure there will be an insurrection. I don’t think his base is as energised as it was in 2020 leading into 2021, and I also think the actual consequences for the insurrectionists probably deter people from attempting it again. I might be wrong.

I still stand by my prediction that the single most likely outcome of the election is enough Trump/Republican loyalist election officials refuse to certify votes, leading to neither candidate reaching 270. The decision will then be thrown to Congress, where Trump will win.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

Raffensperger spoke against it, but he’s not the one who gets to decide – the MAGA-controlled elections board does.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
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 source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.wabe.org/raffensperger-blasts-proposed-rule-requiring-hand-count-of-ballots-at-georgia-polling-places/

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.4K

    Posts

  • 109K

    Comments