High(ish) turnout and lack of problems doesn’t contradict there were attempts to suppress voter turnout, as others were simultaneously working to bring awareness to it, drive turnout, and make the attempts unsuccessful.
Something new that surprised me at the polls that I hadn’t heard mentioned is we (in GA) had to sign an attestation that we were eligible to vote. WTF is the point of that.if you have voter id and supposedly vet voters on the back end?
Well, there’s also attempts to reduce the vote. This isn’t even debatable - multiple politicians have been caught saying so.
As for a ball of nothing, it’s.paetly less of a thing due to the pushback against some proposals. ie.if people treated it like nothing from the beginning, it’d be more of a thing.
What did people have to crawl across broken glass to vote? Similar laws to other states. The whole framing of this was always ridiculous, much like the rest of the end of democracy nonsense. Looks like people could indeed vote without some kind of heroic effort and will continue to be able to.
This is the biggest red flag from the 2020 election. Trump absolutely crushed it as expected, there was visible and tangible show of support for Trump all the way through, which by comparison even now, Biden and Dems don’t even hold a candle to the sheer numbers Republicans bring in at rallies.
Same thing again, huge red wave expected, the numbers were there, massive show of support - and yet still a struggle to take the senate - very bizzare after watching Biden policies strand migrants in a confusing mess, dropping people from airplanes, abandoning Afghanistan entirely and letting it fall to the taliban knocking women’s rights back to the Stone Age, and then Biden literally doing nothing effective to stop or fix roe v Wade by packing the court, the list goes on. Biden’s weakness opened the door wide open for Russia to invade Ukraine and China to escalate pressure on Taiwan. Oh and several hundred thousand Covid deaths.
Democrats should consider these results in the mid terms a miracle because there’s literally no tangible show of support anywhere at rallies, tv, social media, that reflects the voting results.
C’mon now, we can have more nuanced conversations than the talking heads. A very obvious attempt to drive down some votes here in GA was the attempt to ban Sunday voting.
Is it doesn’t require heroic effort really the baseline we want, and we should ignore efforts to suppress the vote that doesn’t make it harder? vs it should be easy and convenient for anyone eligible?
I’m sure you wouldn’t be ok with, say requiring fighting your way to the polls, right? That used be be seen as ok by some, but we should be beyond that. Make it easier to get more eligible voters out, not harder. That should be the baseline in voter laws.
I disagree that any significant suppression is happening due to new or updated or enforced voting regs. It’s a red herring.
Perfection is a target among technocrats. I don’t think it’s possible. If someone has an anxiety attack when approaching the voting place, is that suppression? Some might say yes. I’d disagree. Strongly.
If a state doesn’t verify voter signatures on mail ballots what’s to keep Vladimir Putin from voting in its elections?
Nine states, the Virgin Islands and Washington, D.C., verify that an absentee/mail ballot envelope has been signed but do not conduct signature verification:
Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Kansas, Maryland, Nebraska, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Wyoming.
What’s to stop him from printing up some official-looking ballots?
Here in Oregon my wife and I had ballots mailed to us while we were out of the country for most of the year even though neither of us had ever registered to vote. I called the registrar’s office and was told if we had ballots we could vote.
you answered that you didn’t think significant suppression happened. my question was do you actually disagree that high turnout doesn’t contradict that there were attempts to suppress voter turnout? And a bonus - do you think there are attempts to suppress voter turnout?
Security featurea built into the process. for exame, in CT (the first state in your list), “The Town Clerk processes the returned application, ensures that the voter is eligible to receive an absentee ballot, and enters the voter’s information into the Central Voter Registration System. At that point, a unique serial number is created for each ballot to ensure only the voter who requested it can vote with that ballot.”
This is more a rhetorical matter now, don’t you think? In NY the Democratic gerrymandering was so over the top the courts shut it down. Is that not voter suppression? There are simple answers to your questions, but both the questions and the answers are simplistic, imo.
Creating a unique serial number for each ballot is a pretty secure method for eliminating unqualified voters. The only way around it would be to hack the serial number creation process which is probably almost impossible.
Depends on what you think is important. You seem focused on the fact of voter suppression on turnout, so you might think so. I think 1) that the fact that attempted voter suppression by legislatures happen (undeniably, imo) is an important topic in itself, even if u successful, and 2) I would contest that we don’t really know the effects of these efforts despite high turnout (there’s a lot of registered voters not voting. would turnout be even higher? I’m not ready to just say nope, all good.).
Yes, gerrymandering is horrid. I don’t know about NY, but I know GA and WI suck ass. Too bad SCOTUS has basically said 1 person, 1 vote is important, but it doesn’t matter if that vote counts for anything! CA does this very well… they could gerrymandered a few more D seats if left to the legislature, but the citizens’ commission does a good job overall.