Politics Forum
|
List All Forums | About |
![]() ![]() Section 5: States Subject: Voter Suppression Msg# 1118752
|
||||||
Ed Thanks for pointing out all those holes as the Dem have been wrongly spouting their talking points-- falsely alleging voter suppression. Summarizing a couple points
<< Abrams decried suppression -- Seems it didn't happen. -- She got more Black votes cast than had ever been cast before << if you are assessing something as important as possible voter suppression, you attempt to measure actual vs possible effect. They left out those actual statistics Now this week we've see the Washington Post issue four Pinocchios to Biden for his false criticisms of the new Georgia election law. Again there was more hypocrisy from Stacey Abrams -- celebrating New Jersey expanding to nine days of early voting when her own state of Georgia has 17. Typical Dems fake statements. Governor Kemp has pointed out how reports about the food and water issue have been twisted and misrepresented by various sources, including Biden. Kemp pointed out that most states around the country have had laws like this for years -- keeping voters from being harassed and electioneered while they are standing in line preparing to vote, within a 150ft buffer around the polling location. Beyond that boundary, political groups and others can still offer food and water. Within that boundary poll workers can offer water coolers, and also voters can carry their own food and water Florida law makers are planning new legislation similar to Georgia's, including the extension of its existing 100 ft boundary to 150 ft And I'll not be surprised if other states take additional steps promoting election integrity. Pushing back against HR-1 and against the 2020 election foibles. |
||||||
|
||||||
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: And yet more African Americans voted in the Abrams/Kemp gubernatorial than ever before and the recent presidential number was even higher for that group than the previous election. Your second reference was written before the Abrams election and decried the possible effect on persons of color by the closures. Seems it didn't happen...when all the votes were in. She got more Black votes cast than had ever been cast before by that group. Neither reference tallies the number of voters each of the polling places to be closed actually served voters previously. I saw plenty of numbers but did I miss that statistic? Seems to me if you are assessing something as important as possible voter suppression, you attempt to measure actual vs possible effect. I did see that in Texas, voters who had used now closed polling places were allowed to use any other polling place. If designed to inhibit voting by any group, that seems poorly designed. And back to my troll hole |