Nah seriously your comment was out of line.
You should be talking about getting 10 more people to vote with you instead of giving up.
Are you trolling or something wtf is your problem?
Georgia 6th Congressional District Special Election - (Handel WINS 52%-48% over Ossoff)
- Thread starter Scoop
- Start date
You should be talking about getting 10 more people to vote with you instead of giving up.
Are you trolling or something wtf is your problem?
Lord_Chief_Rocka
Superstar
Out of line
Foh nikka
I'm not even a demacrat. He's lucky I voted for him once considering I'm a one issue voter and he doesn't address it
Piff Huxtable
Delaney 2020,2024,2028...
the Republican will get 55% in the run-off 
Did you put a LICK of effort into finding out, or because no one spoon fed you his issues, he must be just "anti-trump"?
DlAMONDZ
That pu$$y got me grinning
Because out of 20 candidates, only 2 with go at it in the runoff. Republicans are going to rally behind Handel even if a huge chunk of them don't like her
This district is rich, white and probably christian. All staples of the republican party
daemonova
hit it, & I didn't go Erykah Badu crazy, #yallmad
I know republicans want to kill themselves, they don't want to vote for karen handel, so they will vote for her so that, she will lose next year. They just have to hold their noses for 18 months.
Georgia Is Trying To Block Newly Registered Voters From Taking Part In Fierce Runoff Election
Five civil rights and civic engagement groups have filed suit against Georgia and its secretary of state for attempting to block registered voters from participating in a closely watched runoff election in Georgia’s 6th Congressional District.
On Thursday, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law filed a complaint in the federal district court in Atlanta, arguing that the state is violating the National Voter Registration Act. That law sets 30 days before a federal election as the earliest permissible deadline for voter registration.
Georgia complied with the provision for the special congressional election held this past Tuesday. But because no candidate won 50 percent of the vote, there will be a second election on June 20 ― a runoff between the top two finishers, Democrat Jon Ossoff and Republican Karen Handel.
Georgia election officials contend that the June runoff is simply a continuation of the special election this week, so they don’t have to allow newly registered voters to participate. The registration deadline for Tuesday’s election was March 20, and officials say anybody who registers after that day is not eligible to vote in the June runoff.
Ezra Rosenberg, co-director of the voting rights project at the Lawyers’ Committee, argues that under the federal law, Georgia can’t set the registration deadline for the June 20 runoff any earlier than 30 days before that election ― that is, May 22.
“The case is actually a very, very simple case,” Rosenberg told reporters on a conference call Thursday. “Federal law specifically defines elections as including runoff elections.”
The National Voter Registration Act, passed in 1993, defines the word “election” based on the Federal Election Campaign Act. That 1971 statute defines an election as “a general, special, primary, or runoff election.”
Georgia Is Trying To Block Newly Registered Voters From Taking Part In Fierce Runoff Election | The Huffington Post
Five civil rights and civic engagement groups have filed suit against Georgia and its secretary of state for attempting to block registered voters from participating in a closely watched runoff election in Georgia’s 6th Congressional District.
On Thursday, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law filed a complaint in the federal district court in Atlanta, arguing that the state is violating the National Voter Registration Act. That law sets 30 days before a federal election as the earliest permissible deadline for voter registration.
Georgia complied with the provision for the special congressional election held this past Tuesday. But because no candidate won 50 percent of the vote, there will be a second election on June 20 ― a runoff between the top two finishers, Democrat Jon Ossoff and Republican Karen Handel.
Georgia election officials contend that the June runoff is simply a continuation of the special election this week, so they don’t have to allow newly registered voters to participate. The registration deadline for Tuesday’s election was March 20, and officials say anybody who registers after that day is not eligible to vote in the June runoff.
Ezra Rosenberg, co-director of the voting rights project at the Lawyers’ Committee, argues that under the federal law, Georgia can’t set the registration deadline for the June 20 runoff any earlier than 30 days before that election ― that is, May 22.
“The case is actually a very, very simple case,” Rosenberg told reporters on a conference call Thursday. “Federal law specifically defines elections as including runoff elections.”
The National Voter Registration Act, passed in 1993, defines the word “election” based on the Federal Election Campaign Act. That 1971 statute defines an election as “a general, special, primary, or runoff election.”
Georgia Is Trying To Block Newly Registered Voters From Taking Part In Fierce Runoff Election | The Huffington Post
Man these people are scum.
The GOP candidate in that Georgia special election is a pioneering vote suppressor
But it is not the least bit surprising that Handel would declare Democratic electoral victories illegitimate either. Seven years ago, Handel was Georgia’s Secretary of State — its chief elections officer. In that role, she was a top advocate for a then-innovative method of voter suppression. She spearheaded an illegal purge of Georgia’s voting rolls. And she even tried to prevent Democratic candidates from appearing on the state’s ballots.
The purge
Less than two months before the 2008 presidential election, Jose Morales received an ominous letter. The letter told Morales, a Georgia college student who became a naturalized citizen in 2007, that his citizenship status was unclear and that a hearing would determine whether he was actually allowed to vote.
According to a lawsuit he filed less than a month before the election, Morales was told that his name would be removed from the state’s voter rolls unless he affirmatively proved that he was a U.S. citizen. As a result, Morales traveled to an election office half-an-hour from his home to show them his passport. Nevertheless, Morales received yet another letter after this trip informing him that if he did not contact the elections office or appear at a hearing, he would be disenfranchised.
The letter informed her that she had only one week to prove her citizenship. It was dated October 2, but postmarked October 9. So, by the time this letter arrived in her mailbox, the deadline was past.
The state eventually allowed him to vote — after Morales made the special trip to show his passport and after he filed his lawsuit against Handel’s office. But he was one of over 50,000 individuals flagged by a voter purgeand over 4,500 flagged as a potential non-citizen.
The culprit, according to Morales’ suit, was a process Handel set up — ostensibly to weed out non-citizen voters. When someone applied for a Georgia driver’s license, they were required to tell the state whether or not they are a citizen. But these records are not updated when someone’s citizenship status changes. Nevertheless, Handel ordered county election officials to check voter registrants against the driver’s license database in order to weed out non-citizens.
Morales, like many other Georgia residents, applied for a driver’s license before he was naturalized. Thus, the driver’s license database still listed him as a non-citizen despite the fact that this information was inaccurate.
Though Handel’s purge was especially likely to catch naturalized citizens like Morales in its net, it also roped in eligible voters who were born in the United States. Kyla Berry, for example, is an American citizen born in Boston. Yet she received a letter stating that her local elections office “has received notification from the state of Georgia indicating that you are not a citizen of the United States and therefore, not eligible to vote.”
The letter informed her that she had only one week to prove her citizenship. It was dated October 2, but postmarked October 9. So, by the time this letter arrived in her mailbox, the deadline was past.
The good news for voters targeted by this purge is that Morales’ lawsuit was largely successful. A panel of three Republican-appointed federal judges ordered Handel to allow purged voters to cast ballots — albeit through a somewhat drawn out process — and to “reasonably ensure that no voter is permanently deleted from the voter registration list” based on the purge.
But we can never know how many of the thousands of voters who received ominous letters falsely challenging their right to vote were deterred from voting that year.
Locking Democrats out of the ballot
In the middle of an election cycle, Republican state Sen. Joe Carter decided to withdraw from his reelection race and run for a judgeship instead. Carter was slated to run unopposed, which meant that there would be no candidates for his soon-to-be-vacant seat.
According to the Atlanta-based alt-weekly Creative Loafing, Handel solved this problem by allowing new candidates to qualify to appear on the ballot — but only if they were Republicans. “Democrats,” the alt-weekly reported, “weren’t given the chance to field a candidate for the newly open seat.”
And this was not an isolated incident. On the day before a primary election for a state house race, Handel ruled that the lone Democratic candidate must be removed from the ballot because he didn’t qualify as a resident of the district. She also did not allow Democrats to submit a new candidate.
Then, when Michelle Conlon, a Democrat, gathered enough signatures to appear on the ballot as an independent, Handel tried to disqualify Conlon as well by “arguing that a page containing dozens of signatures could be thrown out if a single signer was a nonresident.” Conlon eventually prevailed in a lawsuit against Handel.
Handel similarly tried to kick Jim Powell, a Democratic candidate for the state’s Public Service Commission, off the ballot — claiming that Powell was not a resident of the district where he hoped to run because he’d claimed a property tax exemption on real estate he owned in a different district. The state supreme court unanimously concluded that Handel “committed an error of law that authorizes reversal of the Secretary’s decision.”
https://thinkprogress.org/the-gop-c...-is-a-pioneering-vote-suppressor-34de8e90d2f4
But it is not the least bit surprising that Handel would declare Democratic electoral victories illegitimate either. Seven years ago, Handel was Georgia’s Secretary of State — its chief elections officer. In that role, she was a top advocate for a then-innovative method of voter suppression. She spearheaded an illegal purge of Georgia’s voting rolls. And she even tried to prevent Democratic candidates from appearing on the state’s ballots.
The purge
Less than two months before the 2008 presidential election, Jose Morales received an ominous letter. The letter told Morales, a Georgia college student who became a naturalized citizen in 2007, that his citizenship status was unclear and that a hearing would determine whether he was actually allowed to vote.
According to a lawsuit he filed less than a month before the election, Morales was told that his name would be removed from the state’s voter rolls unless he affirmatively proved that he was a U.S. citizen. As a result, Morales traveled to an election office half-an-hour from his home to show them his passport. Nevertheless, Morales received yet another letter after this trip informing him that if he did not contact the elections office or appear at a hearing, he would be disenfranchised.
The letter informed her that she had only one week to prove her citizenship. It was dated October 2, but postmarked October 9. So, by the time this letter arrived in her mailbox, the deadline was past.
The state eventually allowed him to vote — after Morales made the special trip to show his passport and after he filed his lawsuit against Handel’s office. But he was one of over 50,000 individuals flagged by a voter purgeand over 4,500 flagged as a potential non-citizen.
The culprit, according to Morales’ suit, was a process Handel set up — ostensibly to weed out non-citizen voters. When someone applied for a Georgia driver’s license, they were required to tell the state whether or not they are a citizen. But these records are not updated when someone’s citizenship status changes. Nevertheless, Handel ordered county election officials to check voter registrants against the driver’s license database in order to weed out non-citizens.
Morales, like many other Georgia residents, applied for a driver’s license before he was naturalized. Thus, the driver’s license database still listed him as a non-citizen despite the fact that this information was inaccurate.
Though Handel’s purge was especially likely to catch naturalized citizens like Morales in its net, it also roped in eligible voters who were born in the United States. Kyla Berry, for example, is an American citizen born in Boston. Yet she received a letter stating that her local elections office “has received notification from the state of Georgia indicating that you are not a citizen of the United States and therefore, not eligible to vote.”
The letter informed her that she had only one week to prove her citizenship. It was dated October 2, but postmarked October 9. So, by the time this letter arrived in her mailbox, the deadline was past.
The good news for voters targeted by this purge is that Morales’ lawsuit was largely successful. A panel of three Republican-appointed federal judges ordered Handel to allow purged voters to cast ballots — albeit through a somewhat drawn out process — and to “reasonably ensure that no voter is permanently deleted from the voter registration list” based on the purge.
But we can never know how many of the thousands of voters who received ominous letters falsely challenging their right to vote were deterred from voting that year.
Locking Democrats out of the ballot
In the middle of an election cycle, Republican state Sen. Joe Carter decided to withdraw from his reelection race and run for a judgeship instead. Carter was slated to run unopposed, which meant that there would be no candidates for his soon-to-be-vacant seat.
According to the Atlanta-based alt-weekly Creative Loafing, Handel solved this problem by allowing new candidates to qualify to appear on the ballot — but only if they were Republicans. “Democrats,” the alt-weekly reported, “weren’t given the chance to field a candidate for the newly open seat.”
And this was not an isolated incident. On the day before a primary election for a state house race, Handel ruled that the lone Democratic candidate must be removed from the ballot because he didn’t qualify as a resident of the district. She also did not allow Democrats to submit a new candidate.
Then, when Michelle Conlon, a Democrat, gathered enough signatures to appear on the ballot as an independent, Handel tried to disqualify Conlon as well by “arguing that a page containing dozens of signatures could be thrown out if a single signer was a nonresident.” Conlon eventually prevailed in a lawsuit against Handel.
Handel similarly tried to kick Jim Powell, a Democratic candidate for the state’s Public Service Commission, off the ballot — claiming that Powell was not a resident of the district where he hoped to run because he’d claimed a property tax exemption on real estate he owned in a different district. The state supreme court unanimously concluded that Handel “committed an error of law that authorizes reversal of the Secretary’s decision.”
https://thinkprogress.org/the-gop-c...-is-a-pioneering-vote-suppressor-34de8e90d2f4
Not sure what he's talking about. He seems to have a ceiling around 47-48%. I was hoping he'd get more of the independent vote once the field narrowed. I don't trust that 5% of undecideds. Are there universities in this district?
Counting. Eggs. Hatching. Etc.
Cautious but optimistic seems to be the best expectation to have here.
That is way too close to make any bold declaration. At those number they might as well be tied. Of course the media will act like its the most amazing thing ever for democrats