Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WOODSTOCK, Ga. (AP) — “Conservative activists in Georgia and some other states are quietly pushing a way to remove names from the voting rolls without filing a formal legal challenge.

They’re asking election administrators to use their data to purge voter registrations, which means names could be removed in a less public process than a formal voter challenge. The strategy could mean electors won’t be summoned in advance to defend their voting rights and the identities of those seeking to purge voters might not be routinely public.”
https://apnews.com/article/georgia-voter-removal-software-eagleai-266ead9198da7d54421798e8a1577d26

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh goodie. They’re going to run out the clock again with a series of wrong maps. If Southerners can’t handle simple map making, perhaps some Federal oversight can accomplish it quicker.

The Supreme Court of the United States, the ultimate in federal oversight, told them to draw two majority Black districts and they still couldn’t manage to do it.

They can manage to do it, they just don’t want Black people to have any representation, so they’re not going to do it. This will go like the other states with maps that were ruled illegal. They make a white supremacist version, it gets challenged, it loses, they make another white supremacist version, it gets challenged, it loses, etc etc until, oh no, they just have to have people starting voting in one of the white supremacist maps. Shrug, right? White power preserved for another day.

+1 Elsewhere in Alabama…

Update: “The Black mayor of Newbern, Alabama will finally lead his town after being blocked from entering office by his white predecessors, pending a signature from a federal judge on a settlement agreement both parties reached last week.

The settlement declares Patrick Braxton as the “lawful mayor of Newbern,” and grants him all the powers, duties, privileges and “all other rights enjoyed by prior mayors and entrusted to the mayor of Newbern under Alabama state law.”

There are SO many reasons, like this powerful one here and some of the others cited in this thread. I hope the OP has the rationale now. Protection of voter rights and our entire system of elections is very much needed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh goodie. They’re going to run out the clock again with a series of wrong maps. If Southerners can’t handle simple map making, perhaps some Federal oversight can accomplish it quicker.

The Supreme Court of the United States, the ultimate in federal oversight, told them to draw two majority Black districts and they still couldn’t manage to do it.

They can manage to do it, they just don’t want Black people to have any representation, so they’re not going to do it. This will go like the other states with maps that were ruled illegal. They make a white supremacist version, it gets challenged, it loses, they make another white supremacist version, it gets challenged, it loses, etc etc until, oh no, they just have to have people starting voting in one of the white supremacist maps. Shrug, right? White power preserved for another day.

+1 Elsewhere in Alabama…

Update: “The Black mayor of Newbern, Alabama will finally lead his town after being blocked from entering office by his white predecessors, pending a signature from a federal judge on a settlement agreement both parties reached last week.

The settlement declares Patrick Braxton as the “lawful mayor of Newbern,” and grants him all the powers, duties, privileges and “all other rights enjoyed by prior mayors and entrusted to the mayor of Newbern under Alabama state law.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh goodie. They’re going to run out the clock again with a series of wrong maps. If Southerners can’t handle simple map making, perhaps some Federal oversight can accomplish it quicker.

The Supreme Court of the United States, the ultimate in federal oversight, told them to draw two majority Black districts and they still couldn’t manage to do it.

They can manage to do it, they just don’t want Black people to have any representation, so they’re not going to do it. This will go like the other states with maps that were ruled illegal. They make a white supremacist version, it gets challenged, it loses, they make another white supremacist version, it gets challenged, it loses, etc etc until, oh no, they just have to have people starting voting in one of the white supremacist maps. Shrug, right? White power preserved for another day.

+1 Elsewhere in Alabama…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Good god. They aren’t even trying to hide the intimidation now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Good god. They aren’t even trying to hide the intimidation now.

How is that intimidation? If you aren’t legal, you can’t vote. That’s the law there. Are you saying that it’s intimidation because it discourages illegal aliens from voting?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Good god. They aren’t even trying to hide the intimidation now.

How is that intimidation? If you aren’t legal, you can’t vote. That’s the law there. Are you saying that it’s intimidation because it discourages illegal aliens from voting?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Good god. They aren’t even trying to hide the intimidation now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can't win on ideas, win on voter intimidation.

See.... here is the problem with the Biden Harris X postings....
They either clip videos to make them seem controversial, or they take words out of context and put them in the posting to appear controversial.
They assume people will not either find the full clip OR that they won't look at the video at all.
There is absolutely NOTHING controversial about what Lara said. She is exactly right.

So find a transcript and provide the context in which what she says is appropriate, but please bear in mind that she has already promised four years of retribution if Trump gets back in, so you can see why people assume violent intentions from the nepotist’s mouth.

Having attorneys in all of these major polling locations.... we can't wait to litigate weeks after they happen.....
We need people to hit the ground running.

What is controversial about this?

First, is that the direct quote? Just looking for quotes and a source. And second - yeah, russkie, having attorneys at polling locations is indeed pretty controversial. The hell is wrong with you?