Georgia Enacts New Voting Restrictions

Thomas White

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2020
1,196
708
37
Stockbridge
✟79,254.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
First of all, that was only one tiny part of the bill. People are focusing on it like focusing on the trees and ignoring the forest.
Second, the voters are adults and are capable and intelligent enough to bring what they need for a given situation. If they can stand in line to ride an amusement park ride at Six Flags, then they should be intelligent enough to have what they need in line at the polls.

Again, as I said, most people don't know to bring it. They don't expect 8-9 hour waits. Instead, they wait in line a while, get thirsty, and leave, just not voting. How is that positive? Line warmers help prevent that by providing water/food. We try to help make voting as easy as possible. That should be the government's goal as well.
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
38,740
12,122
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟652,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Again, as I said, most people don't know to bring it. They don't expect 8-9 hour waits. Instead, they wait in line a while, get thirsty, and leave, just not voting. How is that positive? Line warmers help prevent that by providing water/food. We try to help make voting as easy as possible. That should be the government's goal as well.

Well, most people should know unless they're a first time voter.
 
Upvote 0

chilehed

Veteran
Jul 31, 2003
4,711
1,384
63
Michigan
✟237,116.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
If we are both in line to vote in Georgia and you are thirsty, it is illegal for me to give you my extra bottle of water. I could go to jail because I don't want you to be dehydrated. Thank the legislation Governor Kemp signed behind locked doors yesterday.
Nonsense. I just read the bill.
 
Upvote 0

Thomas White

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2020
1,196
708
37
Stockbridge
✟79,254.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

chilehed

Veteran
Jul 31, 2003
4,711
1,384
63
Michigan
✟237,116.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Which part is nonsense?
The part where you selectively quote the law, leaving out key information to support the patently false narrative that it puts people at risk of starvation and dehydration.

If you want to have an honest discussion, then quote all of the relevant parts, including from the explanatory notes at the beginning.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Direct Driver

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2021
1,141
445
59
Kentucky
✟12,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm all for voting laws that simply require a person to prove who they are when they vote or request an absentee ballot. A driver's license or power bill or other such thing should be fine. It enables the state to confirm that even if you are not who you are, you only get the one vote. And if you stole someone else's identity, that is a felony. If they complain when they try to vote and can't, well, that is when it gets investigated.

But this is preposterous: which many argue will make voting harder for people of color.

They think "colored" people are stupid. I know quite a few black people that are seriously offended by that thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

Direct Driver

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2021
1,141
445
59
Kentucky
✟12,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
"nor shall any person give, offer to give, or participate in the giving of any money or gifts, including, but not limited to, food and drink, to an elector..." (SB 202, 1812-1814)

You can find the entire bill at the following link: https://www.legis.ga.gov/api/legislation/document/20212022/201121

Which part is nonsense?
The interpretation about water is nonsense. Here is what it actually says:
1824 "(e) This Code section shall not be construed to prohibit a poll officer from distributing
1825 materials, as required by law, which are necessary for the purpose of instructing electors
1826 or from distributing materials prepared by the Secretary of State which are designed solely
1827 for the purpose of encouraging voter participation in the election being conducted or from
1828 making available self-service water from an unattended receptacle to an elector waiting in
1829 line to vote."

To simplify by removing the other things under the same section, it says this:
"(e) This Code section shall not be construed to prohibit a poll officer from...making available self-service water from an unattended receptacle to an elector waiting in line to vote."

And that is the only mention of water in the entire document. Your claim is absolutely false.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

Thomas White

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2020
1,196
708
37
Stockbridge
✟79,254.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
The part where you selectively quote the law, leaving out key information to support the patently false narrative that it puts people at risk of starvation and dehydration.

If you want to have an honest discussion, then quote all of the relevant parts, including from the explanatory notes at the beginning.

OK. Which parts are explanatory? Please post them. I assure you that I left no relevant information out.
 
Upvote 0

Thomas White

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2020
1,196
708
37
Stockbridge
✟79,254.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
The interpretation about water is nonsense. Here is what it actually says:
1824 "(e) This Code section shall not be construed to prohibit a poll officer from distributing
1825 materials, as required by law, which are necessary for the purpose of instructing electors
1826 or from distributing materials prepared by the Secretary of State which are designed solely
1827 for the purpose of encouraging voter participation in the election being conducted or from
1828 making available self-service water from an unattended receptacle to an elector waiting in
1829 line to vote."

To simplify by removing the other things under the same section, it says this:
"(e) This Code section shall not be construed to prohibit a poll officer from...making available self-service water from an unattended receptacle to an elector waiting in line to vote."

And that is the only mention of water in the entire document. Your claim is absolutely false.

That clearly says POLL OFFICER. I am not a poll officer. I cannot give water to someone because of the new law. Nothing I said is false. Only the poll officer is immune.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
That clearly says POLL OFFICER. I am not a poll officer. I cannot give water to someone because of the new law. Nothing I said is false. Only the poll officer is immune.
So the poll officer is immune. And that means that the hysterical talk about people dying on line waiting 9 hours to vote, etc. is bunk.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Direct Driver

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2021
1,141
445
59
Kentucky
✟12,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
That clearly says POLL OFFICER. I am not a poll officer. I cannot give water to someone because of the new law. Nothing I said is false. Only the poll officer is immune.
Is this some sort of joke? The law is trying to keep people not in line from interfering with people in line. In fact, you are turning a positive into a negative. They are calling out that it is ok for poll officers to get water to people in line that may be thirsty.

Seriously, this complaint is missing the mark, bigly.

To summarize, if this is all you have, you have nothing. Less than nothing, actually

In fact, dare I say it, if a guy went through the crowd handing out water bottles and he was not canvassing for a candidate or the label on the bottles was not, the "poll officer" would probably let him do it.

It's like you are "looking for communists under the bed".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

Direct Driver

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2021
1,141
445
59
Kentucky
✟12,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So the poll officer is immune. And that means that the hysterical talk about people dying on line waiting 9 hours to vote, etc. is bunk.
I notice the law doesn't allow the poll officer to give people big mac's. There will be lives lost. :D
 
Upvote 0

chilehed

Veteran
Jul 31, 2003
4,711
1,384
63
Michigan
✟237,116.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I assure you that I left no relevant information out.
If you think that then you haven't studied the bill carefully enough, because you most certainly did neglect to include relevant information. Keep reading; does the phrase "150 feet" mean anything to you? How about "Protecting electors from improper interference, political pressure, or intimidation"?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Site Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Given Trump’s astonishing credentials, astute business acumen, and talents as a great stateman and leader, I can say with certainty that most of what he says and does is correct, if not all of it. If Trump defends someone from disreputable attacks, he does so with a sound mind and profound judgement. He is reputable, but his opponents are not. They just seem to hate him without merit.

Is there a Poe award?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,984
9,400
✟380,249.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
It's because in Georgia, the long lines only happen in the largely populated cities. Last year, the 8-9 hour lines usually only occurred at precincts in which the population was majority Black/Hispanic. Without the water, it gets harder for anyone to deal with an 8-9 hour line.
So why are there so few precincts?
Of course, that is ideal, but the average citizen is not informed enough to know to do that. Most people are just hoping to pop in and vote before or after work. Some go during their lunch break. They aren't expecting long lines.
Again, as I said, most people don't know to bring it. They don't expect 8-9 hour waits. Instead, they wait in line a while, get thirsty, and leave, just not voting. How is that positive? Line warmers help prevent that by providing water/food. We try to help make voting as easy as possible. That should be the government's goal as well.
If 8-9 hour waits keep happening every election year, I find it hard to believe that most people don't expect them. I would expect anyone who has experienced such a line to talk about it with their family and friends. I would expect word of that to spread throughout communities.
 
Upvote 0

chilehed

Veteran
Jul 31, 2003
4,711
1,384
63
Michigan
✟237,116.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Again, as I said, most people don't know to bring it. They don't expect 8-9 hour waits.
So now that you've had even more ample opportunity to learn what the law actually says, you know that it doesn't at all forbid giving food or drink to the vast majority of the people in line and that the only people it does forbid giving it to have only a very short time to wait.
 
Upvote 0

Thomas White

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2020
1,196
708
37
Stockbridge
✟79,254.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
So now that you've had even more ample opportunity to learn what the law actually says, you know that it doesn't at all forbid giving food or drink to the vast majority of the people in line and that the only people it does forbid giving it to have only a very short time to wait.

What are you talking about? I literally quoted you the section that forbids it.
 
Upvote 0

chilehed

Veteran
Jul 31, 2003
4,711
1,384
63
Michigan
✟237,116.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
What are you talking about? I literally quoted you the section that forbids it.
And, as you've been repeatedly told, totally ignored very important parts of that same section. At this point I find it difficult to think that you're not doing it intentionally.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Thomas White

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2020
1,196
708
37
Stockbridge
✟79,254.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
And, as you've been repeatedly told, totally ignored very important parts of that same section. At this point I find it difficult to think that you're not doing it intentionally.

You have yet to show any section that I have ignored. I, on the other hand, have quoted the actual legislation and provided a link and line numbers to prove what I am saying.
 
Upvote 0