Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 4/7/2021 at 6:24 PM, DonkeyCigars said:
I was going to say; liberals were yelling this to high heaven when all the rubes and poor uneducated people blew everyone's minds and actually elected Trump.
And yet liberals still manage to restrain themselves from passing voter suppression laws. But you already know that, don't ya?
  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
  On 4/7/2021 at 6:24 PM, DonkeyCigars said:

I was going to say; liberals were yelling this to high heaven when all the rubes and poor uneducated people blew everyone's minds and actually elected Trump.

Expand  

Fortunately the rubes, half whits and you, got outvoted by a lot in 2018 and 2020 so your only recourse is to post stupid takes on this board. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
  On 4/7/2021 at 4:59 PM, DonkeyCigars said:

Yes. 

Why not, given the circumstances and his statements around those circumstances? 

Essentially, make Rob M. confirm that he doesn't personally care about voter supression and is only operating out of pandering sentiment towards the issues of the day and don't allow him to weasel out of it personally, while making operational/professional decisions and stances that contradict and point to hypocrisy, personally.

It feels like in 2021, there is no corporate veil. We pierce these days, so that is what is informing my question.

Edited to add; his respect points would go through the roof and I'd think the world of him if he said "No, I'm not going to do anything personally and it's none of your business, quite frankly. I'm charged to lead this organization and do right by it and that's what I'm doing."

Expand  

You sound kinda woke. You should maybe check yosef.

Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 3:32 AM, tchookem said:
  On 4/7/2021 at 6:24 PM, DonkeyCigars said:
I was going to say; liberals were yelling this to high heaven when all the rubes and poor uneducated people blew everyone's minds and actually elected Trump.
Expand  

And yet liberals still manage to restrain themselves from passing voter suppression laws. But you already know that, don't ya?

Expand  

What little I know about all this is from some news aggregators and email news, but what I could gather doesn't seem that big of a deal. Maybe someone can help me on why people are freaking out:

The limits on absentee ballots don't sound very suppressive:

  Quote

Shrinks the window for voters to request mail-in ballots, allows officials to send ballots only to voters who request them, and introduces ID requirements in place of signature matching.  

Expand  

This sounds like an equal opportunity for whomever is in power, which will likely be Dems for the foreseeable future due to demographic shifts: 

  Quote

Power over local elections is being stripped from the secretary of state, an elected position, and transferred to a newly created position that's appointed. Critics say this removes the nonpartisan flavor of election governance.

Expand  

This is the dumbest thing to get bent around the axle about and I don't see how this is suppressive:

  Quote

The law bans handing out food or drink within 150 feet of a polling place or within 25 feet of any voter.

Expand  

But wait. More access in some cases?

  Quote

The GA law guarantees a minimum # of drop boxes for mail ballots per county, expands early voting in most small counties, and adds more resources to polling places where lines get long.

Expand  

 

  • Fuck You 2
Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 11:33 AM, tchookem said:
  On 4/8/2021 at 4:53 AM, DonkeyCigars said:
 
Expand  

Yeah, all that has already been stated and refuted. I know I'm tired of hearing your bullshit... I just wish you'd get tired of spreading it.

Expand  

If you are telling me there is actual discussion and points being raised and “refuted” on the last few pages and not just people like you gnashing teeth at what appear to be phantom issues, then I’m encouraged and content to go back and read the conversation, sparing you from having to rehash it.

Reread your whiny stupid post above, and you will appreciate how I wouldn’t have assumed that to be the case initially.

  • Fuck You 1
Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 12:04 PM, DonkeyCigars said:
If you are telling me there is actual discussion and points being raised and “refuted” on the last few pages and not just people like you gnashing teeth at what appear to be phantom issues, then I’m encouraged and content to go back and read the conversation, sparing you from having to rehash it.
Reread your whiny stupid post above, and you will appreciate how I wouldn’t have assumed that to be the case initially.
"Phantom issues"... like election integrity and voter fraud? But you already know about that, don't ya?

Fuck off, troll.
Posted (edited)

“Why does everyone think these literacy tests are designed to prevent black people from voting? If you ask me, you’re the real racists assuming that black people are too dumb to pass them!”

Edited by wildcat09
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
  On 4/7/2021 at 4:59 PM, DonkeyCigars said:

Yes. 

Why not, given the circumstances and his statements around those circumstances? 

Essentially, make Rob M. confirm that he doesn't personally care about voter supression and is only operating out of pandering sentiment towards the issues of the day and don't allow him to weasel out of it personally, while making operational/professional decisions and stances that contradict and point to hypocrisy, personally.

It feels like in 2021, there is no corporate veil. We pierce these days, so that is what is informing my question.

Edited to add; his respect points would go through the roof and I'd think the world of him if he said "No, I'm not going to do anything personally and it's none of your business, quite frankly. I'm charged to lead this organization and do right by it and that's what I'm doing."

Expand  

 

 

1*XRa2SMveRrEtfEyfODHrcA.png

 

It would make no difference at all if he dropped his personal membership, so what's the point?  It likely wouldn't even makes the local news. He doesn't hate Georgia; he disapproves of this new voter suppression bill.

The MLB moving the game as well as corporations speaking out sends a much bigger message and actually affects the state rather than a single person boycotting or protesting.  It's like when conservatives ask, "If you want higher taxes, why don't YOU voluntarily give more to the government?  Curious."  Because that wouldn't be enough to make even the slightest of a difference. Quitting his membership to Augusta would only affect him and nothing else.

Edited by Tom
Posted

Let's talk for a minute about the Texas lege, the lege that has about two months left in its session IIRC? Working tirelessly to pimp more 'election integrity' laws, despite after spending over 22,000 hours (courtesy of Paxton's AG office) and resolving around 16 prosecutions mostly related to people listing the wrong address. I don't know if the case involving JP Tomas Ramirez, the election OFFICIAL (not voter) in Medina County is included in those cases but I suspect not.

Meanwhile, after 125 people DIED due to causes related to the Snowpocalypse, the Ohio insurance company is saying--you're on your own ERCOT-pay your own damages, and windfall profits (over $16 billion in overcharges), the weak SB3 (mandating weatherization) is going to languish and pols are going back and forth on whether repricing is necessary.

I get it. Infrastructure, unless it's collapsing on your head or you don't want to pay for it (political redmeat) is boring. But what a monumental waste of time to propose all this garbage voter stuff here when whatever fraud there is gets exposed and dealt with already. Mostly to insure that the AGs office retains his high cost of operation for Mr. Paxton's pleasure and to give the grievance committee something to rally around when they head to the polls.

Meanwhile, watch your bills climb ever higher as nothing happens until the next big freeze and oh look, infrastructure! That's capitalism for you, socialism for the rich.

 

  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 12:44 PM, Tom said:

 

 

1*XRa2SMveRrEtfEyfODHrcA.png

 

It would make no difference at all if he dropped his personal membership, so what's the point?  It likely wouldn't even makes the local news. He doesn't hate Georgia; he disapproves of this new voter suppression bill.

The MLB moving the game as well as corporations speaking out sends a much bigger message and actually affects the state rather than a single person boycotting or protesting.  It's like when conservatives ask, "If you want higher taxes, why don't YOU voluntarily give more to the government?  Curious."  Because that wouldn't be enough to make even the slightest of a difference. Quitting his membership to Augusta would only affect him and nothing else.

Expand  

A point could be to stand up for something you believe in and care about, if you actually do, and show some skin in the game by feeling a little pain. It would also be support and allyship to the activists calling for a boycott of The Masters, and his profile and stature as someone who just executed an MLB boycott of sorts, is wholly relevant and topical here.

Hear me, though, I’m not saying he is obligated or owes anyone anything here, I’m just saying it seems like a good move based on the circumstances if he is, indeed, a fervent personal believer that this GA law is bogus.

And because my last sentence logically follows, one could infer that NOT doing this represents a shallow personal support at best, or at worst a pandering disbelief and a pragmatic surrender to activist pressure.

Either way, a great win for activists and activism as a tool for progressive change.

Posted (edited)
  On 4/8/2021 at 1:05 PM, DonkeyCigars said:

I voted for Trump and I think a majority of commentary is not pressure tested, but a troll I am not.

Expand  

Imagine if half the shit out of Trump's mouth was pressure tested?  Imagine if his oral bowel movements faced 1/10th the scrutiny as a post in the Cloak Room while he was President---the nation would have collapsed under the weight of this pressure tester.  

You may have voted for his vision for the direction of the country, but his running commentary on that direction was the most untested verbal espousing since Michael Phelps read the Bible in Latin for his books on tape series.

 

Edited by Lobo
Posted (edited)
  On 4/8/2021 at 1:22 PM, Lobo said:

Imagine if half the shit out of Trump's mouth was pressure tested?  Imagine if his oral bowel movements faced 1/10th the scrutiny as a post in the Cloak Room while he was President---the nation would have collapsed under the weight of this pressure tester.  

You may have voted for his vision for the direction of the country, but his running commentary on that direction was the most untested verbal espousing since Michael Phelps read the Bible in Latin for his books on tape series.

 

Expand  

Agreed. He was a functional disaster and famously unable to control his impulses and act forthright in his own interest. It was like he was a lab creation who ran away before he was finished.

But, like most times Trump is brought up in 2021, not sure how he is relevant in this discussion, outside of ye Olde, “you are a troll because you voted against my guy and werent on my team last year” lazy knee jerk.

Edited by DonkeyCigars
  • Fuck You 1
Posted

Yeah, it becomes more and more obvious (not to mention mathematically empirical)...if he had controlled himself and stayed the fuck out of Georgia...he would have lost that state but 1 or Both of the Senate elections would have tipped to McConnell and the GOP and we'd have a 50/50 Government (D's get House and Oval, R's get SCOTUS and Senate).  I would have been totally fine with that.  But he couldn't help himself, he was impulsive and a half-baked monster, as you say.  

He just tones down his bullshit by maybe 1/3rd, if that, and Georgia goes Blue for Biden and Red for Senators.  And this voter suppression debate probably doesn't even happen, or it's of such minutia, that nobody but a few election law attorneys from the Deep South pay attention to it.  Instead, it's national news, it's effecting our National Pastime, and it's causing Dan Patrick to say, "Hey Georgia, Hold my Beer!"  Only, Dan Patrick doesn't drink beer because it goes straight to his hips, he's more of a White Claw "type of guy."  

Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 1:25 PM, DonkeyCigars said:

Agreed. He was a functional disaster and famously unable to control his impulses and act forthright in his own interest. It was like he was a lab creation who ran away before he was finished.

But, like most times Trump is brought up in 2021, not sure how he is relevant in this discussion, outside of ye Olde, “you are a troll because you voted against my guy and werent on my team last year” lazy knee jerk.

Expand  

So why did you vote for a functional disaster?  There was a competent candidate running against him in 2016.  You may not agree with her politics but you cannot deny her competency.   One was a disaster who fumble fucked everything he touched, who actively sought to harm America and its allies, and was only limited by his laziness and stupidity in doing more harm.  The other was a sharp public figure, with limited charisma (her Howard Stern interview showed that she could be in fact, likeable and human) and a heck of a resume.   

The other lost money owning a casino, despite not paying the people who built it.  

Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 1:03 PM, Mrs Whiggins said:
Let's talk for a minute about the Texas lege, the lege that has about two months left in its session IIRC? Working tirelessly to pimp more 'election integrity' laws, despite after spending over 22,000 hours (courtesy of Paxton's AG office) and resolving around 16 prosecutions mostly related to people listing the wrong address. I don't know if the case involving JP Tomas Ramirez, the election OFFICIAL (not voter) in Medina County is included in those cases but I suspect not.
Meanwhile, after 125 people DIED due to causes related to the Snowpocalypse, the Ohio insurance company is saying--you're on your own ERCOT-pay your own damages, and windfall profits (over $16 billion in overcharges), the weak SB3 (mandating weatherization) is going to languish and pols are going back and forth on whether repricing is necessary.
I get it. Infrastructure, unless it's collapsing on your head or you don't want to pay for it (political redmeat) is boring. But what a monumental waste of time to propose all this garbage voter stuff here when whatever fraud there is gets exposed and dealt with already. Mostly to insure that the AGs office retains his high cost of operation for Mr. Paxton's pleasure and to give the grievance committee something to rally around when they head to the polls.
Meanwhile, watch your bills climb ever higher as nothing happens until the next big freeze and oh look, infrastructure! That's capitalism for you, socialism for the rich.
 

One thing that hadn’t been noticed is that several billion dollars of federal education dollars the state recently received isn’t being given out to school districts but is instead being used to balance the general budget. Sorry don’t have a link handy. Go find it your damn self.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 12:44 PM, Tom said:

 

 

1*XRa2SMveRrEtfEyfODHrcA.png

 

It would make no difference at all if he dropped his personal membership, so what's the point?  It likely wouldn't even makes the local news. He doesn't hate Georgia; he disapproves of this new voter suppression bill.

The MLB moving the game as well as corporations speaking out sends a much bigger message and actually affects the state rather than a single person boycotting or protesting.  It's like when conservatives ask, "If you want higher taxes, why don't YOU voluntarily give more to the government?  Curious."  Because that wouldn't be enough to make even the slightest of a difference. Quitting his membership to Augusta would only affect him and nothing else.

Expand  

I mean corporations are what line the GOP's pockets, and that's why they get into it. Mitch McConnell calling them "stupid" is a bit like when Paul Heyman was calling Vince McMahon "the evil empire" back in 1997 when it was known that Vince was cutting him and ECW a check every week.

As to the state's threats to close tax loopholes those companies usually enjoy: that's a bluff. It usually goes the other way around: corporations threaten state governments that if they don't receive those benefits, they'll just relocate to another state. And it usually works, too (see Fidelity and Raytheon in Massachusetts back in the late 1990's). Corporations aren't begging particular state governments for those benefits; they'll usually find them even if they have to look somewhere else. It does not pain them at all.

Anyways, you know that your party is a bag of dicks when even the corporations are openly calling you a bag of dicks. 

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 2:20 PM, Nivek said:

So why did you vote for a functional disaster?  There was a competent candidate running against him in 2016.  You may not agree with her politics but you cannot deny her competency.   One was a disaster who fumble fucked everything he touched, who actively sought to harm America and its allies, and was only limited by his laziness and stupidity in doing more harm.  The other was a sharp public figure, with limited charisma (her Howard Stern interview showed that she could be in fact, likeable and human) and a heck of a resume.   

The other lost money owning a casino, despite not paying the people who built it.  

Expand  

Psssshhh. Tip of the iceberg.

But that's what red America is: all about the sizzle, none about the steak. They loved to think of Trump as a successful businessman when he was nothing of the sort. He was successful, yes. He was successful as a conman and a crook. He had a very successful presentation. But a businessman? Shit, I'm a better businessman than he ever was.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 4:53 AM, DonkeyCigars said:

This sounds like an equal opportunity for whomever is in power, which will likely be Dems for the foreseeable future due to demographic shifts: 

  Quote

Power over local elections is being stripped from the secretary of state, an elected position, and transferred to a newly created position that's appointed. Critics say this removes the nonpartisan flavor of election governance.

Expand  
Expand  

I assume you're asking about this in good faith and I'll take a stab at explaining it.

Today, the Georgia Secretary of State has a lot of authority over elections and it is a statewide elected position.  So, if 51% of Georgians elect a Democrat to that position, the Democrats have a lot of control over how elections are run.

Under this new law, much of that authority is removed from the Secretary of State and given to an appointed board.  The board is appointed by the state legislature.  The problem is that (just like in Texas) the voting districts are gerrymandered.  So, if Republicans may have only gotten 45% of the vote in the statewide election for Secretary of State, they can still control the legislature.  This allows the minority party to appoint the people who will control elections.

You're right that demographics are changing in the state.  This is a stop gap measure by the GOP to retain control even as they lose their statewide majority.

Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 2:59 PM, fuggled said:

I assume you're asking about this in good faith and I'll take a stab at explaining it.

Today, the Georgia Secretary of State has a lot of authority over elections and it is a statewide elected position.  So, if 51% of Georgians elect a Democrat to that position, the Democrats have a lot of control over how elections are run.

Under this new law, much of that authority is removed from the Secretary of State and given to an appointed board.  The board is appointed by the state legislature.  The problem is that (just like in Texas) the voting districts are gerrymandered.  So, if Republicans may have only gotten 45% of the vote in the statewide election for Secretary of State, they can still control the legislature.  This allows the minority party to appoint the people who will control elections.

You're right that demographics are changing in the state.  This is a stop gap measure by the GOP to retain control even as they lose their statewide majority.

Expand  

3i5p.gif

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
  On 4/8/2021 at 2:59 PM, fuggled said:

I assume you're asking about this in good faith and I'll take a stab at explaining it.

Today, the Georgia Secretary of State has a lot of authority over elections and it is a statewide elected position.  So, if 51% of Georgians elect a Democrat to that position, the Democrats have a lot of control over how elections are run.

Under this new law, much of that authority is removed from the Secretary of State and given to an appointed board.  The board is appointed by the state legislature.  The problem is that (just like in Texas) the voting districts are gerrymandered.  So, if Republicans may have only gotten 45% of the vote in the statewide election for Secretary of State, they can still control the legislature.  This allows the minority party to appoint the people who will control elections.

You're right that demographics are changing in the state.  This is a stop gap measure by the GOP to retain control even as they lose their statewide majority.

Expand  

Thanks for taking the time and explaining it. It sounds to me like a last ditch effort and stay of execution, but the writing is on the wall. This also sounds like savvy politics and something people would appreciate, if only it aligns with their political vision and desired outcomes. Outside of being more local and at the state level, this is conceptually no different than adding a couple of states with democrat demographics or getting rid of the filibuster because it's politically expedient for your side or adding more supreme court justices since you are in executive power but have judicial minority or any number of savvy political plays the Dems are running, right?

 

  • Fuck You 1
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Something so satisfying about watching these GOP Senators try to make someone look foolish and then getting owned 

 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
  On 4/22/2021 at 6:50 PM, pyrohornIII said:

If you want to call your rep and voice your opinion about SB7 or HR6, here's a little helpful tool.  Once you fill out the data, it finds you rep and connects with you, giving you some advice on how to voice your opposition.  Then it connects you to your rep's staff.  Takes all of 3-5 minutes.   

TDP tool to aid in contacting your state rep.

Expand  

Unless this tool's advice is how to go Beatrix Kiddo on the other eye of Dan Crenshaw, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the advice is worthless. 

  • Haha 1
Posted

 

  On 4/22/2021 at 7:21 PM, SydneyCarton said:

Unless this tool's advice is how to go Beatrix Kiddo on the other eye of Dan Crenshaw, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the advice is worthless. 

Expand  

I agree.  But if we don't speak at all, then they get the idea that no one really cares.     I fully get your point.  These fucks are going to do what they want.   But if the TDP can say later that their tool was used by 6000 voters in a particular district, then at least that rep can't say it was unopposed and everyone loved the bills.

 

I have some of that defeatist attitude as well.  But at the same time, if I can spend 5 minutes tilting at windmills in here, I can spare 5 to make that call.

Posted
  On 4/22/2021 at 7:27 PM, pyrohornIII said:

 

I agree.  But if we don't speak at all, then they get the idea that no one really cares.     I fully get your point.  These fucks are going to do what they want.   But if the TDP can say later that their tool was used by 6000 voters in a particular district, then at least that rep can't say it was unopposed and everyone loved the bills.

 

I have some of that defeatist attitude as well.  But at the same time, if I can spend 5 minutes tilting at windmills in here, I can spare 5 to make that call.

Expand  

Oh, I see the value. I was really just having some catharsis in regards to cyclops. Although I am quite defeatist about my district. Ever since that Vox article got posted this morning on the Sunset thread I've been depressed. 

Posted

Also on this shit:

Yesterday, the Texas House passed HB 530 to allow election judges to carry handguns into a polling place, with an 88-55 vote. It is expected to receive a final vote today and be sent over to the Senate.  

So let's make the polling place as intimidating as possible.   Who is carrying, and who isn't?   Ridiculous.

Posted
  On 4/22/2021 at 7:29 PM, SydneyCarton said:

Oh, I see the value. I was really just having some catharsis in regards to cyclops. Although I am quite defeatist about my district. Ever since that Vox article got posted this morning on the Sunset thread I've been depressed. 

Expand  

Yeah your boy is a total piece of shit.  No doubt.  And his little goon squad following him like trained monkeys.   

Posted

I’d ask if these traitors realize mail-in voting in large numbers was due to this pandemic thing, but....

Posted

I'm so tired of this shit!   I called and told them if they wanted to screw over the texas voters at least do it in public and not behind closed doors.

 

This is from 1 PM on the 29th.

 

In case you missed it, Chair Cain (R) just tried to take a surprise vote on SB 7 by steamrolling his Vice-Chair, Rep. Jessica González (D), and attempting to sub in the language for HB 6 so that he and Sen. Hughes (R) can rewrite the entire bill behind closed doors. 


Don’t let them.

We need you to call House Speaker Phelan right now and tell him not to let Chairman Cain jam SB 7 through the House Elections Committee today. There has been no hearing, testimony, or public notice on this racist anti-voting bill. 

Take two minutes right now and please call (512) 463-1000 and let Speaker Phelan know that Texans want their voices to be heard. We will not be silenced. 

Thank you for all you do - it really makes a difference.

Posted

this seems like the best thread for this NYT article on texas pubs

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Posted

Huh. No mention of this. MIL scoops Surly.

 

Major corporations come out against proposed voting restrictions in Texas

  Reveal hidden contents

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.texastribune.org/2021/05/04/texas-voting-restrictions/amp/

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/14/us/politics/jessica-gonzalez-texas-voting-rights.html

A good brief interview.

 

  Quote
May 14, 2021Updated 11:31 a.m. ET

As Republicans in the Texas Legislature run roughshod over corporate opposition, public protests and Democratic objections to advance a voting restrictions bill to the brink of passage, State Representative Jessica González, a two-term Democrat from near Dallas, has been at the forefront of the fight.

Ms. González, the vice chair of the House Elections Committee, was the first lawmaker to challenge State Representative Briscoe Cain, the Republican sponsor of the voting bill and the chair of the committee, during the final debate over the bill in the chamber. She previously served as the Nevada voter protection director for former President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign in 2012.

We spoke to Ms. González about the next steps in Texas and how she views the battle over voting rights writ large. The interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.

 
 

OK, quickly: What’s next for the voting legislation in Texas?

So the House version of the “election integrity” bill was vastly different from the Senate version, indicating that both chambers had a different idea of what election integrity will look like. Whether both chambers come together and agree with what the final version looks like, I guess we’ll just wait and see.

Businesses, election officials, faith leaders and Democrats have all opposed the voting restrictions. What else can opponents do to stop the legislation?

Well, we’re still in session, and so fighting against some of these suppression bills hasn’t stopped. And if it goes to a conference committee [a panel of lawmakers who make final changes to legislation], we can be vigilant, and object to the changes made in conference if there are substantial differences, because they will move very quickly.

But I think that it was important and continues to be important for the business community and others to speak out in opposition. I think that definitely put some pressure on the folks that were supporting the bill.

This may be a bit of a hypothetical because we don’t know what the final version of the bill will be. But on what grounds, or under what statute, would legal challenges be made once it passed?

 

Well, a lot of that I’ll leave to the elections lawyers that have to lead litigation in these types of areas. But even just in being vice chair of the committee, there were lots of deviations from standard procedures and practices.

But it’s still a voter suppression bill. In my experience in working on Section 5 and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act — and obviously Section 5 doesn’t apply anymore — you can use those two standards on whether it’s the intent of the author to discriminate, or also the effect of it having a disparate impact on people of color who have historically been discriminated against.

And Texas has a long history of that. You can’t deny that. So I think that’s going to be where the strong argument is.

Looking at this bill and given your experience with the Obama campaign in 2012, what stands out here as something that could particularly restrict or limit voting?

A lot of the changes that my Republican colleagues argue for are about having uniformity throughout the state. Whether that is the amount of polling machines in every county — and you really can’t have uniformity when every county is different. Harris County is different than Loving County.

And so, in my experience in doing voter protection work, it’s important that these elections officials are able to administer their elections, because they’re the ones who are actually on the ground and able to address those issues.

Gov. Greg Abbott has made an election overhaul one of his “emergency priorities.” So expecting that he will want fellow Republicans in the Legislature to give him something to pass, how do you plan for future elections?

 

This session overall, a lot of members who have been here for years are saying that this is the worst session that they’ve served in. And I think people need to know that, and so messaging that to Texans — “Hey, this is what’s going on in your Capitol” — I hope will mobilize people to get out and vote.

So it’ll be incumbent on us to message that if these laws are put into place before the next election cycle, that they know what these new changes are, and hopefully that motivates them. So we can say: “Hey, this is what your vote means. If you don’t go vote, these are the folks that are representing you in Austin that are not making it easier for you to vote.”

Expand  

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

What happens when the “federal review” is done under a Republican regime? I guess I’d like more details on what that means. 
 

we need the gerrymandering shit in there. 



×
×
  • Create New...