quote:

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp said Tuesday he won’t call a special legislative session to tighten residency requirements for the Jan. 5 runoffs, despite pressure from some supporters of President Donald Trump to make it harder for new residents to cast their ballots in the consequential election.

He and Georgia’s two top legislative leaders - Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan and House Speaker David Ralston - released a joint statement that threw cold water on the idea that lawmakers could overhaul voting rules this close to the twin runoffs that could determine control of the Senate.

“Any changes to Georgia’s election laws made in a special session will not have any impact on an ongoing election and would only result in endless litigation,” the three Republicans said.

“We share the same concerns many Georgians have about the integrity of our elections. Therefore, we will follow the coming audit and recount closely and will work together to keep Georgia’s elections safe, accessible and fair.”

State Rep. David Clark, who was crushed this week in a bid to oust Ralston as new speaker, is among several Republicans who urged the governor to call lawmakers back to Atlanta. He said legislators should make it harder for newly-arrived Georgians to cast their ballots in the runoffs to prevent outsiders from “interfering in our elections.”

State law allows new residents to register to vote with county officials by Dec. 7. It also makes it a felony to vote if you are in the state briefly with the intention to move away.

Clark and other critics say it opens the possibility for a wave of out-of-state residents to move to Georgia for the dual runoffs, which pit U.S. Sen. David Perdue against Jon Ossoff and U.S. Sen. Kelly Loeffler against the Rev. Raphael Warnock.

There’s no evidence of a crush of out-of-state residents moving to Georgia for the election, though former presidential candidate Andrew Yang announced he would move to the state for the runoffs and encouraged his supporters to follow him. It’s not clear if Yang intends to register to vote.

Kemp had earlier announced a special session to fix a legal problem in a Hurricane Michael relief measure, though he also pointedly added at the time that he could direct lawmakers to also tackle “budgetary and oversight issues.” The timing of that session is still uncertain.

There’s still a chance that rank-and-file lawmakers could force a ballot access debate this year: State officials note that legislators can bring themselves in for a special session with a two-thirds vote. But it’s seen as highly unlikely.

Anthony Kreis, a constitutional law professor at Georgia State University, said any effort to change voting laws at this stage would have been soundly rejected by the judicial system.

“Let’s be clear,” he said. “Calls for the Georgia General Assembly to be convened in a special session for the purpose of altering absentee rules to suppress the vote are grotesquely un-democratic, an abuse of power and a constitutionally suspect form of racial discrimination.”

Deteriorata posted:

Not as far as I can tell.

This thread was established to discuss on-the-ground activism to aid his campaign. His policies are easily found with Google searches. If you don't like him and don't think he should win election, then this thread isn't for you.

Majorian posted:

, claiming that one candidate saying he will not support the GND means he will caucus with the Republicans needs some pretty strong supporting evidence, since that's a bold claim to make.

Majorian posted:

No, that's not your call to make. People can absolutely criticize any and all of the candidates involved in the Georgia election ITT.

e: I think people should vote for and support Ossoff, as much of a dingus as he is, and especially Warnock, but there are things to criticize about both of them. This is a debate & discussion forum, so debate and discussion will be encouraged.

However, those criticisms need to be detailed, well-argued, and with citations included. For example, claiming that one candidate saying he will not support the GND means he will caucus with the Republicans needs some pretty strong supporting evidence, since that's a bold claim to make.

Coredump posted:

Since this is a runoff should the criticisms be structured as "this candidate is the better choice than this candidate and here's why" since the choices are effectively choose between this dem, this republican, or don't vote. Otherwise the criticisms seem pointless and stifle calls to action. I mean for all the criticism about Ossoff not being left enough in this election your other choice is Perdue, do you think you can get him to move more left?

Ruzihm posted:

If you intend to not support the passage of a bill, doesn't that mean you either intend on voting present or intend on voting with the party that unanimously will vote against it?

That's all I meant. Maybe I shouldn't have used the word caucus, I was talking about collaborating on that one issue.

I'll temper that point accordingly.

Deteriorata posted:

Kemp is not joining the crazy train.

Apathy420 posted:

Majorian posted:

there are a few who live in Georgia and who may choose not to vote, or to vote third party. ...

Does that sound fair?

CommieGIR posted:

Yeah, there's no sample ballot yet for this runoff, but here's a previous runoff ballot:

https://www.dekalbcountyga.gov/sites/default/files/users/user3587/Combined%20Composite%20Ballot-Website.pdf

There's no write ins. No third parties. If you were not on the last ballot and didn't achieve the necessary margins, you don't get put on the ballot for the runoff.

Fuschia tude posted:

No, there are no "third party" candidates in a runoff election. That's what "runoff" means.

Majorian posted:

Bleh, you're right, I wasn't thinking. Even so, my point stands: not voting is an option, and we should listen to the arguments of people who are considering taking that option.

Majorian posted:

Bleh, you're right, I wasn't thinking. Even so, my point stands: not voting is an option, and we should listen to the arguments of people who are considering taking that option.

Deteriorata posted:

Unless people specifically live in Georgia, this should not be allowed.

Discendo Vox posted:

There's nothing lost by the removal of trolls. These are users fundamentally opposed to participation in democratic government. not every thread should need to cater to a rabid group of users who are opposed to its subject. That's how we wound up with the GE thread.

Discendo Vox posted:

There's nothing lost by the removal of trolls. These are users fundamentally opposed to participation in democratic government. not every thread should need to cater to a rabid group of users who are opposed to its subject. That's how we wound up with the GE thread.

Majorian posted:

If people are trolling here, they'll be probated. But not everybody who disagrees with you is a troll.

Discendo Vox posted:

Criticisms of "electoralism" in a senate runoff aren't coming from a sincere standpoint, especially when they begin at page 1 and are allowed to continuously define the scope of discussion for every following page. As with so many other parts of DnD, you should not be letting the assholes with the most abusive positions to define the scope of what conversation is allowed to occur.

Aruan posted:

I'm confused about the purpose of this thread. Is it to discuss what's going on the race, our personal opinions of the candidates, or is it have a referendum on the candidates to guide voting choice amongst the few people who live in Georgia that read this thread?

Raenir Salazar posted:

One point I didn't see brought up is whatever Ossoffs positions regarding a GND may be, the fact he is for PR and DC statehood means his vote for a hypothetical GND also won't in the long run matter all that much; he will vote to press the button which will allow everyone else to vote.

FizFashizzle posted:

lmao we're getting Ossoff ads in Asheville of all places.

I'd like to hope they've got information about out of state voters living here and aren't just trying to plaster the northern most edge of the north georgia mountains

Technowrite posted:

Columbia County here! My fiancee and I will cast votes for Ossoff and Warnock on Jan. 5.

mediaphage posted:

i suppose they may also think it's worth it to motivate out-of-state donations

FizFashizzle posted:

lmao we're getting Ossoff ads in Asheville of all places.

quote:

What are the most pressing issues facing the state/nation on the healthcare front? Should Medicaid be expanded? What are your thoughts on the push for Medicare for All? What steps should be taken to help Georgia’s maternal mortality crisis?
In the midst of a pandemic, when Americans are being forced to choose between their health and their constitutional right to vote, we are seeing that access to quality, affordable healthcare is a crisis. We should be improving the Affordable Care Act and defending protections for people with pre-existing conditions. I’m committed to working across the aisle to lower the cost of prescription drugs through price negotiations, including pushing for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid to be empowered to negotiate lower drug pricing and advocate for more ability to work with our partner countries to bring in prescriptions to market at lower cost but the same level of quality and safety. We can push for Congress to roll back the power of special interests by imposing caps on the maximum price that can be charged for life-saving drugs and limiting the excessive use of patents to encourage market competition.

We also need to protect coverage for reproductive healthcare, defend it against partisan attacks, and address the high maternal and infant mortality rates—especially among Black and Native American women—by tackling bias in our healthcare system and medical professional training. [We need to] make it easier for states to expand Medicaid and create a public option for those that want it, as well as give people with employer-based coverage the choice to participate.

Sharks Eat Bear posted:

Yeah if he doesn’t get those out of state donations, then how will his campaign be able to afford ad buys outside of Georgia to drum up more contributions?

Cpt_Obvious posted:

This is the first real campaign in a post Trump environment. What are the Democratic candidates running on? The entire foundation of the Democratic platform was removing Trump, so what are these senatorial candidates proposing now that he’s lost? Are the pushing Medicare for all? The GND? What’s the policies that they’re running on?

Edit: to be clear, they are obviously attempting to get more senate seats for the Democrats. What are they proposing they’ll do with those seats?

Cpt_Obvious posted:

This is the first real campaign in a post Trump environment. What are the Democratic candidates running on? The entire foundation of the Democratic platform was removing Trump, so what are these senatorial candidates proposing now that he’s lost? Are the pushing Medicare for all? The GND? What’s the policies that they’re running on?

Edit: to be clear, they are obviously attempting to get more senate seats for the Democrats. What are they proposing they’ll do with those seats?

Cpt_Obvious posted:

This is the first real campaign in a post Trump environment. What are the Democratic candidates running on? The entire foundation of the Democratic platform was removing Trump, so what are these senatorial candidates proposing now that he’s lost? Are the pushing Medicare for all? The GND? What’s the policies that they’re running on?

Edit: to be clear, they are obviously attempting to get more senate seats for the Democrats. What are they proposing they’ll do with those seats?

whydirt posted:

I don't think it's fair to call a run-off of the 2020 general election a post-Trump environment since all of the candidates and their platforms are from that election.

Neurolimal posted:

I believe the context is of turnout; democrats need a motivation that isnt "Not Trump" now that Trump is out.

Georgia runoffs typically have significantly lower turnout, largely in the Republican's favor. Not having Trump to rally around will worsen that.

whydirt posted:

That's explicitly not the context of the post I quoted, which was Just Asking Questions about basic policy positions that are answerable from five minutes on the candidates' websites. I can't think of any runoff elections where candidates made substantive changes to their policy platforms in the span of a few weeks, but I'm happy to hear of examples of it so I can learn something!