If nothing else, couldn’t a campaign (or folks aligned with one) get a hold of a mailing list for the other side and send out the “wrong” link in an email telling folks to check their registration? Or hand out fliers in certain neighborhoods with QR codes that lead to the “wrong” page?
1 Like
https://cancelmyregistration.sos.ga.gov/s/
it’s possible the DL requirement is on the next screen but the first screen on the website doesn’t require it.
Yeah, it looks like the next screen requires DL # and SS#. If you don’t have a DL#, then it directs you to fill out this form, which seems like an even bigger problem to me, as it requires no other information other than name, DOB, and an “oath” to cancel a registration.
FWIW this could just be attributed to programmers’ natural tendency to copy themselves, combined with project managers’ and other higher ups’ natural tendency to not give a shit about user experience as long any screw ups are technically the user’s fault. “It’s clearly labeled ‘Cancellation Portal’ what more do you want?”
1 Like
Not to dampen vibes, but this seems like a pretty bad thing:
Georgia’s state board of elections adopted new rules for local election boards that permit them to withhold the certification of a vote in the face of unspecified discrepancies…The rule requires local boards to initiate a “reasonable inquiry” when discrepancies emerge at a poll, and gives the power to withhold certification until that inquiry was completed. It does not define the term “reasonable inquiry”, nor does it establish strict limitations on the breadth of an inquiry.
1 Like
I come here for stressful politics and memes to make me feel better about them.
Please don’t do this to me.
That’s a feature, not a flaw.
1 Like
Brian Kemp
Brad Raffensperger
Marjorie Taylor-Greene
Herschel Walker
Who else?
I can’t imagine that Chipper Jones is pulling the lever for Kamala so toss him on the pile
Does John Rocker still live in GA?
1 Like
Oh my god. There is a sports journalist on tiktok who told a good story about his day in a life piece he did on John rocker. I can’t do it justice but if I can find it I will share. Rocker was a huge. Pos to pretty much everyone.
Watch him on Survivor. Absolutely insurfferable to everyone involved.
Rocker has always been a run of the mill deplorable.
On July 17, less than 48 hours before LB 20 was to take effect, Hilgers issued an advisory opinion stating that the new law was unconstitutional. But Hilgers didn’t stop there; he also declared unconstitutional a 2005 reform law ending lifetime disenfranchisement of anyone convicted of any felony; the 2005 law, Legislative Bill 53, allowed Nebraskans to vote two years after completing their sentences, a waiting period that LB 20 was set to eliminate.
In his opinion, Hilgers wrote that the state Board of Pardons—a three-member body composed of him, Evnen, and Republican Governor Jim Pillen—has sole discretion over whether to restore someone’s voting rights. Right after Hilgers issued his opinion, Evnen, the state’s top elections official, emailed county-level elections offices, ordering that, based on the AG’s stance, “we will not be implementing LB 20 and will no longer register individuals convicted of felonies.”
In his opinion calling LB 20 unconstitutional, Hilgers challenged the legislature’s ability to restore people’s voting rights and said those powers rest solely with the state’s pardons board—in other words, up to the discretion of just him, Pillen, and Secretary of State Evnen.
“A pardon is an act of grace that relieves a person of legal consequences of his crime. A legal consequence of a felony is losing the right to vote,” Hilgers wrote in his opinion. “Restoring that right is an act of grace that undoes a legal consequence of a crime. In other words … (T)he act of restoring civil rights is a pardon and within the exclusive power of the Board of Pardons.”
Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers (Photo from Facebook/ Office of the Nebraska Attorney General)
The ACLU, Civic Nebraska, and many others argue this is out of step with existing law. The state’s supreme court has traditionally agreed: In a 2002 case, it ruled that the legislature can determine through statute policy concerning voting rights restoration. State court precedent also casts doubt on Evnen’s interpretation of Hilgers’ recent opinion; in a 1983 case, the court determined that an attorney general’s opinion “has no controlling authority on the state of the law discussed in it.”
Or what?
1 Like
Yea the courts say you need evidence so nothing bad can happen