Sounds like a very prokempt operationâŚ
Shouldnât that be âSounds like a very prokempt pogrom for non-whitesâ, figuratively of course.
Stephen Day â the Democratic-appointed chair of of the Gwinnett Elections Board, who is named as a defendant in the lawsuit â told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution earlier this week that the rejection rates were âunsettling,â but he denied that they were ârooted in some nefarious schemeâ by local officials to â to suppress any type of voter from voting.â
I believe that this is not a nefarious scheme. I think voter suppression is a natural organic manifestation of years of anti-black discrimination. When the SCOTUS wiped out significant parts of the Voting Rights Act, they allowed the reinstatement of everything the Voting Rights Act was designed to stop. And their chief reason was that the Act had worked! In other words, itâs working, so now we donât need it anymore.
I could go on and on, but instead I will recommend a podcast - the latest from Chris Hayes on his podcast Why Is This Happening? It looks at the history of voter suppression.
âWe will not be bullied by out-of-state organizations or political operatives who want to generate headlines and advance a baseless narrative."
Just an observation to share:
These words coming out of the Kemp camp are quite Trumpish. The Kemp campaign went full on Trump during the R primary run-off, but then turned to a more conciliatory posture right after that victory.
However, have been noticeably more Trumpish in the past few weeks, kinda like this quote. Suggesting to me that they are feeling the heat from Stacey Abrams.
I donât know where Chief Justice Roberts got the idea that the USA is past racial shenagans when it comes to elections (Fox ânewsâ and right wing ideology probably.)
But it might be a good side project for TPM to assemble information to the contrary and send Roberts a recent history of how race based voter suppression and other voting obstacles are still happening, and have crawled out of the swamp since Roberts gutted the Voting Richard Act. and sending him regular updates to relieve him of his misunderstanding of the facts
âWe will not be bullied by out-of-state organizations or political operatives who want to generate headlines and advance a baseless narrative. We will do our part to keep elections secure, accessible, and fair in Georgia.â
Afraid lawsuits donât work that way, son. At the risk of bruising your delicate emotions, what you are feeling is not bullying. Itâs called the US Constitution maintaining justice.
Itâs just a less than clever non-denial denial. The GOPâs spin is getting old. They need new material but all the good writers hauled ass when Trump came aboard.
Just like if an umbrella is keeping you dry in a rainstorm, you can throw it away because youâre dry and clearly donât need it anymore. Sad.
That reminds me, I need to chuck this fine umbrella in the trash.
You should check out TPMâs series on voting rights.
As far as sending Roberts that info⌠that sounds like an amicus brief, and anyway thereâs not a case before the court that could serve as a vehicle.
Besides which, the conservative majority on the court is of the opinion that democracy, like baccarat, is for the high-born, and best kept away from the unwashed.
See, this is a reason Iâm not sold on âall mailâ elections. You donât find out if your ballot was rejected until after itâs too late to do anything about it - if ever.
Then there can also be issues with the ballots and the process. Once, I voted by mail in New Mexico. The ballot packet was written in what seemed to be 2-point font, with instructions that I had to read a few times (with difficulty) to understand - and Iâve been educated. As it turned out, a really significant percentage of peopleâs ballots had been done wrong in that all-mail election, due to paranoia-inducing signature requirements and the things I complained about, and were simply thrown out.
Mail-in voting can give you the illusion of having voted, but it shouldnât be your first choice. I await the responses of happy Oregoners who have never even heard of a âpolling place.â
Chris Hayes runs a good podcast. Plus, it comes out more regularly than ⌠well, letâs not get into that.
Voter suppression continues to be the GOPâs main tactic for retaining power, or so it would seem. Criminals, every last one of themâŚthey canât win honestly, so they cheat.
Kempâs quote alone shows why he should never have been permitted to continue to oversee election procedures while simultaneously running for office.
We really do need a national standard and national, nonpartisan oversight of elections. It would have to be done right - the FEPC stalemate in a purposely bipartisan committee shows how easy it can be to screw things up even if everyone has the best intentions going in.
First, thanks for the link.
As for a it as a side project, I was thinking more in terms of public education in general, with a touch of politics in that TPM could regularly make a point of letting it be known⌠Yoo hoo, CJ Roberts, This is what is happening in case you missed it!.
If the breadth of informationTPM has at hand were reduced to a series of bullet points with links, telling the story of how after they gutted the Voting Rights Act - in part because Roberts appears to think weâre past that as a nation - active measures by Republicans to disenfranchise so many Americans fit the pattern and practice that led to the Voting Rights Act in the first place.
I donât know where Chief Justice Roberts got the idea that the USA is past racial shenagans when it comes to elections (Fox ânewsâ and right wing ideology probably.)
Johnny [the Robber Baron][1] made his feelings about racial discrimination crystal clear in the [2007 Seattle School District Case][2]:
The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.
The obvious response would be: I agree with you Mr. Chief Justice. But what if Government officials or businesses, persish the thought, decide that they still want to discriminate?
His answer would appear to be you must work harder to convince them not to discriminate, because this Court will not enforce any laws to stop them.
[1]: The US Supreme Court is more friendly to businesses than any time since World War II
[2]: John Roberts - Wikiquote