Georgia Supreme Court Allows Early Voting on Saturday, Nov. 26 for Senate Runoff
democracydocket.comSubmitted by MarcEElias t3_z2wi0t in news
Submitted by MarcEElias t3_z2wi0t in news
Reply to comment by aecarol1 in Georgia Supreme Court Allows Early Voting on Saturday, Nov. 26 for Senate Runoff by MarcEElias
I fully support Republicans making it hard for Republicans to vote for Republicans to own the libs.
r/leopardsatemyface, indeed.
I normally would, but it’s a statewide election. There are plenty of liberals living in conservative counties and I want them to be able to vote on Saturday.
Yeah, I don't actually support even self-imposed voter suppression; it sets a terrible precedent, and will only exacerbate the baseless claims of electoral malfeasance the Republicans will predictably make if they lose, further weakening our democracy.
If they win I bet they'll say the general election was rigged that's why they did so poorly in it leading to a runoff. At this point if they think lying about the election will benefit them they will do it regardless of the facts.
The election is always rigged, when they win, it was rigged because it should have been a blow out. Both Trump and Bolsonaro made comments like that the last time they each won.
Yeah that's my point they're gonna bitch and moan about it no matter what we do. If they wanna make a galaxy brain move and hurt themselves in their own confusion I say we let them.
It wouldn't be the first time they've done it. Their messaging about not trusting elections probably caused a lot of Republicans to not vote (just speculation).
I also read a report that looked at expected political affiliation and death rates of covid by population and there was a bug enough gap in the right states that it could have given trump the win.
I would fully believe their rhetoric hurt them enough in the last two elections it caused them to lose. It could be the mainstream republicans know this and is why they're trying to distance themselves from Trump and the election conspiracy stuff now.
I love your username.
It's not setting a precedent at all; it's a continuation of the same Republican rhetoric and tactics around voter suppression that they've been running on for over a quarter of a century.
Republican officials suppressing Republican votes would be a new one.
Not really, recent data shows that more Republicans have died from Covid than Democrats. So plenty of Republican policies have already led to the suppression of Republican votes to a permanent end.
To be serious though, vote suppression for Republicans has similar logic as running attack ads--it brings votes down for both candidates, but on the whole the net result favors your side.
Yes, voter suppression by design disproportionately suppresses the vote of one group over another. Not sure what your point is?
I'm responding to your comment about "suppressing Republican votes," and how there's nothing new about Republicans suppressing Republican votes as a means of suppressing even more Democratic votes, even if only in theory and it potentially backfiring.
Not sure what you are confused about, but this conversation feels like it's kind of going in circles. Take care buddy .
I was talking about Republicans specifically targeting Republican majorities with voter suppression being a new thing. You're saying it's not because when Republicans have targeted Democrat majorities with voter suppression, a small number of Republicans were affected via collateral damage.
I have no idea why you think an incidental amount collateral damage is the same thing as being the large, explicit target, but that's where the confusion comes from.
idk... voting sounds like a lot of work to put on the general populous. It makes a whole lot more sense to just have one guy run the show and not worry the people. Now of course they will also need a special police force to make sure no one is trying to make trouble, but that is just the price we need to pay for freedom.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments