DevoHusker

It is already legal in some form in 38 States, so hopefully the Feds follow through with this.

You make me laugh Agreed. I said same thing earlier.

(I didn't write this, but am in full agreement) Why would you oppose voter ID? Why do you need longer hours to vote? No one has opposed absentee ballots. Absentee voting requires you to request a ballot at which time you have to show an ID to prove who you are. Why would you not want voters to prove who they are? Why would voting day need to be on a holiday? What holiday would that be in November? Do you know that employers have to allow time off for you to vote? I for one, am surprised people do not want, in the most important election in this country, for people to have to prove who they are and live where they are supposed to live to be able to vote.

New poll

Easier should not mean no rules...easier should not mean 3 months to cast a vote...easier should not be shotgunning ballots out to every post office box or address...easier should not mean drop boxes on food trucks...easier does not mean "no ID/no problem"

Completely agree

I have been speaking specifically of the water issue. I look forward to more insight on the lawsuits regarding the issue in it's entirety. You might be right regarding my eventual outlook, who knows.

Not sure if related but seems to fit here

Trust me, I am not laughing at the GA districts that have long wait times...I am laughing at (in general not you specifially) the feigned outrage over something so trivial. You say yourself it was already prohibited by the politicking wording...so why then does it matter? I also think it is funny that the left have latched on to this single aspect so stringently because all the other concerns, were mitigated for the most part. You can still early vote. You can still vote on Sundays with your Church. There are still drop boxes. etc/etc/etc et al. (with the exception of the Governor's role: The secretary of state will no longer chair the State Election Board, becoming instead a non-voting ex-officio member. The new chair would be nonpartisan but appointed by a majority of the state House and Senate. The chair would not be allowed to have been a candidate, participate in a political party organization or campaign or made campaign contributions for two years prior to being appointed. The law also says the governor should appoint someone if the position becomes vacant when lawmakers are not in session.)

Hi Moiraine. Thanks for your point of view. Please explain how it makes it harder to vote. Water can be distributed more than 150 feet from the polling place. If that last 50 yards with no water station is going to cause medical dehydration issues, then by all means it would be dangerous...but not harder to vote. If it was already prohibited, and just the language was cleared up to specifically say "water or food", why would it specifically "disenfranchise people of color."

For an hour or two, here in Central NE, they opened up the last hour or so of the day, the past two days, to anyone 18+ because they had some extra doses. (They are officially currently on 40+)

I am not sure who had anointed him "face of the Republican Party" (I thought you said that was it was Hawley...no wait you said it was MTG) but, regardless, they need to kick this POS out of Congress.

I don't believe it does. But again, I doubt that either of us will sway the other on this one. Have a good Easter weekend.

It doesn't bother me at all. I am merely providing commentary on the GA situation, and added commentary that I can't believe it has blown up into this big a deal.

From Athens Georgia https://www.onlineathens.com/story/news/state/2021/03/28/new-georgia-voting-law-what-does-sb-202-change-elections/7038406002/ If you don't think to bring water with you, I doubt that 51 mins will leave you dehydrated.

Go more than 150 feet from the polling place (in most cases) and hand out water to your hearts content. Another new rule that affects both in-person early voting and election day voting would prohibit anyone except poll workers from handing out water to voters in line, and outlaw passing out food and water to voters within 150 feet of the building that serves as a poll, inside a polling place or within 25 feet of any voter standing in line. Depending on the location, it is still possible for third-party groups to have food and water available — and it is possible for the lines to extend beyond 150 feet.

@RedDenver I don't think this back and forth is going to bring us any closer to agreement. You think it is a big deal, and I do not. Please check out the rest of the law, and you will see there were many concessions in the final draft from what was first posted when this came out a month ago. I guess it boils down to the fact that conservatives (in general) believe there needs to be checks and balances on the voting procedure, and liberals (in general) believe in more of a free for all.

lol doing so now!

This is the only thing you typed in the post I referenced, along with the Tweets from Mr Doucette. Thanks for including your quote regarding the rest of the law. Again why does this specific part of the new law make it more difficult to stand in line, how does it affect POC more than anyone else, and if it was already illegal via "gifts" how is it earthshattering to actually spell it out? https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/electioneering.aspx Each state has some form of restriction on political activities near polling places when voting is taking place. These restrictions usually include limiting the display of signs, handing out campaign literature or soliciting votes within a pre-determined distance (typically 50 to 200 feet) of a polling place. Some states also address what apparel voters can wear within polling places (read NCSL's blog on the electioneering apparel case that made it to the Supreme Court). This webpage provides a breakdown of prohibitions in each state. Here is a summary: 15 states prohibit campaign apparel/buttons/stickers/placards 37 states prohibit campaign materials/signs/banners/literature 28 States prohibit influencing voters/soliciting votes/political persuasion 17 states prohibit circulating petitions/soliciting signatures 9 states prohibit projecting sounds referring to candidates/issues 6 states prohibit polls/exit polls 9 states prohibit loitering 3 states prohibit peddling/advertising 10 states prohibit voter intimidation/interfering with voter 10 states prohibit obstructing entrance/hindering voter

I guess I haven't seen your answer. You propose a hypothetical in the post I referenced. As for me, picture this: At a GA polling location, in May or November, there is a line of folks waiting to vote. A person pulls a wagon that contains a cooler full of bottled water, and asks folks in line at the polling place if they are thirsty. A large photo of Stacy Abrams or Jon Ossof (or Brian Kemp) is posted on the side of the wagon and cooler. The politician depicted may not even be in the race for this election, but are popular representatives for each party in GA. Do you disagree that it might encourage voters in line believe that Abrams party, or Kemp's party, should get their vote because they were thirsty and were given water? That is what I meant by quid pro quo, and it was not in reference to your previous repeated non answers. Who does this "disenfranchise" and how in the world does it affect POC more than anyone else on election day? My other point still stands. If I believe I will have to stand in line an inordinate amount of time, and I might get thirsty, I would take a beverage with me. I think that this whole thing has been blown out of proportion for the optics. And, regarding the weather in GA for elections, the average daily high temp in May is 80 and the average for November is 63.

I honestly don't get this reference? Me or GA voting...?

If you don't wish to answer my question, that's fine. I will answer yours, as I did earlier in this thread: quid pro quo