On Saturday, March 20, 2021 at 5:26:16 PM UTC-5, John McAdams wrote:
On 21 Mar 2021 02:03:44 -0000, BT George <
brockg...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I'll give you one last chance. What motivates making it illegal in Georgia
>> >> to help feed voters in line? How is reducing the number of polling
>> >> stations in certain districts motivated? Does this help eligible and
>> >> registered voters?
>> >>
>> >> Do you understand that those are important questions?
>> >>
>> >
>> >John I admittedly haven't followed every post in this thread, or even the
>> >details of the Georgia issue very much. ...Though I would agree feeding
>> >voters in line might well prove a way of "manipulating" votes from the
>> >very poor and hungry, especially if the "feeders" would be able to
>> >identify or show support as Dems or Republicans. But I cannot see much
>> >legitimate reason to reduce polling stations only in certain districts.
>> Do you even know that is true?
>>
>
>No I don't. As I said I haven't followed the Georgia issue closely,
>largely because I take it for granted that if it's anything is too crazy
>it won't get too far, and of course, you know my general sympathies are
>not with making voting virtually standardless as the Democrats have shown
>every predilection to do. Do you have knowledge that it is *not* only in
>certain districts? (I can look it up, but since you and Glenn are arguing
>the Georgia, I assumed you would had already dug into it enough to
>validate his claim.)
Glenn made the charge. I'm not going to answer a question *assuming*
that what was asserted it true
>
>> And there could be no legitimate reason? Like maybe, turnout is low
>> in those districts, or there are plenty of polling stations even after
>> the number is reduced?
>> >So if you haven't answered Glenn then I would call on you to "own" head
>> >on your take of the motivation behind this.
>> Nonsense. I don't even know it is true, and I certainly don't know
>> what the motivation is, if it is true.
>>
>> Aren't you aware that the media lie a lot? Remember, they said Trump
>> called white supremacists "good people."
>>
>
>Come on .John. This is still *me*. I believe by now you know me well
>enough to know I am *well* aware the MSM often lies and distorts
>right-wing stands! (Fact: So does some a the right wing
>media---depending on the source.) incidentally Glenn knows very well I
>feel form private conversations that I fell that way and am *passionate*
>about the injustice and he has even agreed he has seen that too sometimes
>and also disapproves. But as my other comments make clear, I would think
>since you and he are debating this at particular *issue* at length, this
>should be something your own research would have confirmed or denied.
That's an evasion, since I'm not going to give an answer that
*assumes* something that might be untrue.
Why are you making excuses for his failure to answer?
He was refusing to answer *long* before he brought up the "closed
polling places" claim about Georgia.
Glenn doesn't deny that Twitter and Facebook have banned Trump.
If he will post evidence that "certain districts" have had voting
places reduced, *and* that there was some nefarious motive, I'll
respond.
He has made the charge, let him support it.
>
>> And they lied about a call he made to a Georgia official.
>>
>> And they lied about a guard at the Capitol in Washington being
>> bludgeoned by a fire extinguisher.
>> >If you answer that, then he will
>> >be in no place to refuse to directly confirm his position on banning Trump
>> >and other Conservatives.
>> >
>> Again, nonsense. I don't even know whether his polling station claim
>> is true.
>>
>> But he knows perfectly well whether he approves of Trump being banned.
>>
>> Why do you think he won't answer?
>>
>
>I am withholding judgement for now---because I know on past discussions.
>Based on those, I believe it unlikely he has a good feeling about that
>kind of censorship.
Then why won't he answer?
He probably doesn't like the *left* being censored.
>His point seems to be he is still awaiting your
>answer to his questions and then he will address yours, because he is
>accusing you of changing the subject. Regarding the answers he says he
>wants, if he is right about it targeting certain districts, it's a valid
>question that wouldn't hurt you to answer and leave him *no excuse* to
>remain silent on this point. Of course, if he is wrong about it being
>only in certain districts, then he is missing a key justification for why
>the Republican efforts in Georgia are so bad. (And as I already said,
>feeding hungry voters is generally suspect; all the more so if it can be
>done by partisans who want to influence a vote, so that doesn't bother me
>much on the Republican effort.) So maybe then all you need to do is point
>out how that is a misrepresentation of the Republican effort.
>
Let him produce evidence.
But just to show you how silly this is, the leftist WASHINGTON POST
admitted the following:
<Quote on>
But Janine Eveler, Cobb County elections director, said she
doesn’t have enough staff trained in advance voting to operate the
same number of polling places for the runoff, which has taken on national
significance because it will determine which party controls the Senate.
“We lost several of our advance voting managers and assistant managers
due to the holidays, the workload and the pandemic,” Eveler responded
in a letter to the groups. She added that “the remaining team members
who agreed to work would do so only if the hours were less onerous. …
We are at the end of the election cycle and many are tired or just
unwilling to work so hard, especially during this time of year.”
In an interview Monday, Eveler said the workers are seasonal employees
hired and trained for statewide elections. She said that many of them
were “not willing to work 14-hour days for six days a week for three
weeks.”
Eveler said the county will add more check-in stations that were used in
the general election, which should get voters into the booth more quickly.
She also noted that voters will have only three contests on the runoff
ballot: the two Senate races and a seat on the Georgia Public Service
Commission.
Eveler said she did not think voters of color would be adversely affected.
She said the early-voting sites are located in “each quadrant of
the county,” and while acknowledging that some voters will be
inconvenienced, she said that “there are other options for
voting.” She said voters could use absentee ballots or show up on
Jan. 5, when all of the county’s 145 precincts will be open.
<end quote>
So it seems it's only EARLY VOTING stations that have been closed.
Good that the leftist WASHINGTON POST actually presented the other
side of the story.
.John
-------------------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm