Fat Smelly Black Chick Loser Anyone?

[Spurtacular]

How about an obese loser of the last Georgia governor's race for the Democrat presidential nominee?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/stacey-abrams-democrats-dont-have-too-many-candidates/ar-BBVTiH9?ocid=spartanntp#image=1

[Winehole23]

Much preferable to the fat smelly guy we've got now. The election she lost was literally rigged. Her opponent purged half a million voters from the rolls the year before the election.

Stacey Abrams is more educated, more eloquent, more principled, and more devoted to the form of governemt and the people.

No chance though, because she's fat black and female.

Fat, white, boorish, corrupt, unprincipled and male? No problem.You're the president.

[Pavlov]

Derp is clearly a hit with the ladies evidenced by his late Friday night screeching.

[Spurtacular]

Present

:lol Par

[Spurtacular]

Much preferable to the fat smelly guy we've got now. The election she lost was literally rigged. Her opponent purged half a million voters from the rolls the year before the election.

Stacey Abrams is more educated, more eloquent, more principled, and more devoted to the form of governemt and the people.

No chance though, because she's fat black and female.

Fat, white, boorish, corrupt, unprincipled and male? No problem.You're the president.

Would like to see a link if you have one.

[Pavlov]

:lol ParI think her being overweight would hurt her as a candidate as there is a huge double standard women are held to by bitter incels like you.

[Spurtacular]

I think her being overweight would hurt her as a candidate as there is a huge double standard women are held to by bitter incels like you.

:lmao Yea, the "incels" have a monopoly on fat shaming.
:lmao Psychopav Chump

[Pavlov]

:lmao Yea, the "incels" have a monopoly on fat shamingYou started a thread titled "Fat Smelly Black Chick Loser Anyone?"

Clearly this is very important to you as an incel.

Tell us, when did you smell this woman?

[apalisoc_9]

Derp got rejected by a fat smelly chick.

[Spurtacular]

You started a thread titled "Fat Smelly Black Chick Loser Anyone?"

Clearly this is very important to you as an incel.

Tell us, when did you smell this woman?

Are you under the impression that obese people smell better than healthy weight people?

:cry I love science 'til I don't :cry

[Spurtacular]

This is me trying!!!!!!

:lmao Loser

[Pavlov]

Are you under the impression that obese people smell better than healthy weight people?

:cry I love science 'til I don't :cryI believe that overweight people can smell just as good or as bad as anyone else.

When did you smell this particular woman, derp?

[Pavlov]

Are you under the impression that obese people smell better than healthy weight people?

:cry I love science 'til I don't :cryDerp thinks Trump smells bad.

It's just science!

[Spurtacular]

I believe that overweight people can smell just as good or as bad as anyone else.



Is this what you tell yourself when your scale tells you that you're 110 pounds over your ideal weight?

:lmao Psychopav truth

[Pavlov]

Is this what you tell yourself when your scale tells you that you're 110 pounds over your ideal weight?

:lmao Psychopav truth:lmao derp narrative

Tell us, derp -- when have you ever seen me?

[Spurtacular]

:lmao derp narrative

Tell us, derp -- when have you ever seen me?

Isn't your goal to go unseen?

You telling me that sitting on your ass for 16 hours a day while going past your prime is a winning strategy for you?

[Spurtacular]

Derp thinks Trump smells bad.

It's just science!

At a cellular level he's likely below the mean. Though someone like him probably invests in the best hygiene products to combat this reality.

[Pavlov]

Isn't your goal to go unseen?

You telling me that sitting on your ass for 16 hours a day while going past your prime is a winning strategy for you?Derp, you didn't answer the question.

When have you ever seen me?

At a cellular level he's likely below the mean.What makes him smelly on a cellular level, derp?


Though someone like him probably invests in the best hygiene products to combat this reality.So your claim is overweight people can smell good.

You just automatically think an overweight black woman has to smell bad.

:lol racist incel derp

[Winehole23]

Would like to see a link if you have one.

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/voter-purge-begs-question-what-the-matter-with-georgia/YAFvuk3Bu95kJIMaDiDFqJ/

[CosmicCowboy]

She never did concede that she lost the election.

[Winehole23]

She never did concede that she lost the election.Bully on her for refusing to do so.

Her opponent was the Secretary of State and ran the election that he ran in against her; he also purged half a million Georgians from the rolls in the year before the election -- an election he won by 55,000 votes.

[Spurtacular]

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/voter-purge-begs-question-what-the-matter-with-georgia/YAFvuk3Bu95kJIMaDiDFqJ/

A state doesn't have the right to purge non eligible voters from its rolls?

[Pavlov]

A state doesn't have the right to purge non eligible voters from its rolls?Sure.

How did they determine whether a voter was ineligible, derp?

[Spurtacular]

Sure.

How did they determine whether a voter was ineligible, derp?

I did not come across that in the course of scanning that poorly written article, which is probably the point. A legit reason would destroy the narrative.

[Pavlov]

I did not come across that in the course of scanning that poorly written article, which is probably the point. A legit reason would destroy the narrative.:lmao you suck horribly at scanning then.

Try reading the article then.

[Reck]

Derp admits to reading comprehesion fail. I guess pav is showing derp some sense after all.

[Winehole23]

I did not come across that in the course of scanning that poorly written article, which is probably the point. A legit reason would destroy the narrative.You didn't scan very well, the reasons are mentioned.

[Spurtacular]

You didn't scan very well, the reasons are mentioned.

List them, then. It should say it in the nut graph. It didn't.

[Pavlov]

List them, then. It should say it in the nut graph. It didn't.Just read the article you twat.

They are all there.

Don't beg us to hold your hand.

[Spurtacular]

Just read the article you twat.

They are all there.

Don't beg us to hold your hand.

:lmao Lashing out.

I already said I scanned it and didn't see it. This isn't my argument; hell it's not even yours; you're just grudge posting.

[Pavlov]

:lmao Lashing out.

I already said I scanned it and didn't see it. This isn't my argument; hell it's not even yours; you're just grudge posting.You failed.

You're asking us to do it for you.

We don't need to hear you admit how stupid you are. We already know.

Read the article.

You could have read it three times over already.

[Spurtacular]

You failed.

You're asking us to do it for you.

We don't need to hear you admit how stupid you are. We already know.

Read the article.

You could have read it three times over already.

You don't have to list reasons if you don't care.

[Pavlov]

You don't have to list reasons if you don't care.I don't have to list the reasons because they are all there in the article you won't read.

You want to be ignorant. You take pride in it.

[Spurtacular]

I don't have to list the reasons

:tu

[Pavlov]

:tuI don't.

You don't even know them do you can't justify the purges.

Period.

lol ignorant derp

[Winehole23]

The article gave him all the ammo he needed, had he been willing to read and repeat what's there.

[Spurtacular]

I don't.

You don't even know them do you can't justify the purges.

Period.

lol ignorant derp

List your reasons or STFU.

[Spurtacular]

The article gave him all the ammo he needed, had he been willing to read and repeat what's there.

:wakeup

Still waiting to hear about these presumably bad reasons for the voter purge.

[Winehole23]

Still waiting to hear about these presumably bad reasons for the voter purge.Bureaucratic mistakes such as presuming people absent from Georgia, when in fact they still lived at the GA addresses at which they are registered.


Republican gubernatorial candidate and current Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp (https://www.rollingstone.com/t/brian-kemp/) incorrectly canceled some 340,000 voter registrations, according to a recent investigation. Although Kemp claimed the voters left the state of Georgia or moved to another country, they hadn’t, Greg Palast, who filed suit against Kemp (https://www.democracynow.org/2018/10/24/greg_palast_sues_georgias_brian_kemp), wrote in Truthout (https://truthout.org/articles/georgias-kemp-purged-340134-voters-falsely-asserting-they-had-moved/).

According to John Lenser, who is CEO of CohereOne and who led a review of the list of purged voters for Palast, “340,000 of those voters remained at their original address. They should have never been removed from the voter registration rolls.”
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/brian-kemp-340000-voters-748165/

[Spurtacular]

Bureaucratic mistakes such as presuming people absent from Georgia, when in fact they still lived at the GA addresses at which they are registered.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/brian-kemp-340000-voters-748165/

Okay. Fair enough.

(He had to go to another article asshole Pavlov).

[Pavlov]

Okay. Fair enough.

(He had to go to another article asshole Pavlov).It's all in the first article you still haven't read.

:lol ignorant derp

[Spurtacular]

It's all in the first article you still haven't read.

:lol ignorant derp

I told you I scanned it. You can put up or shut up, dude.

[Winehole23]

So if you scan an article, but you don't see what's there, it's the responsibility of other posters to tell you what's there?

Wouldn't it be easier just to reread it instead of shitposting with Pavlov for hours?

[Pavlov]

I told you I scanned it. You can put up or shut up, dude.

Yeah, you said you're a failure when it comes to scanning.

So just actually, you know, read it like a normal human being.

[Pavlov]

So if you scan an article, but you don't see what's there, it's the responsibility of other posters to tell you what's there?

Wouldn't it be easier just to reread it instead of shitposting with Pavlov for hours? He'd have to read it once to be able reread it.

Everything has to be all out war with this dope. He thinks ignorance is his shield.

[Spurtacular]

Yeah, you said you're a failure when it comes to scanning.

So just actually, you know, read it like a normal human being.

You can post shit if you have shit like a normal human being.

[Spurtacular]

So if you scan an article, but you don't see what's there, it's the responsibility of other posters to tell you what's there?

Wouldn't it be easier just to reread it instead of shitposting with Pavlov for hours?

I think it's the "responsibility" of whoever wants to make a case to make a case.

Chump doesn't want to make a case.

He wants to try and make a W out of me not painstakingly reading the entirety of a poorly written long article. Par.

[Spurtacular]

So if you scan an article, but you don't see what's there, it's the responsibility of other posters to tell you what's there?

Wouldn't it be easier just to reread it instead of shitposting with Pavlov for hours?

Also why are you pretending that your fellow sperm shielder has a case? You had to go find another article to make the case. He's claiming your original article explicitly makes the case on cheating. Post the proof if you think you have something, or I'll take it that you're just trolling.

[koriwhat]

So if you scan an article, but you don't see what's there, it's the responsibility of other posters to tell you what's there?

Wouldn't it be easier just to reread it instead of shitposting with Pavlov for hours?

It is when thats pavThetic's M.O. when it comes to others... why are you backing such a loser in the first place?

[Pavlov]

You can post shit if you have shit like a normal human being.
I did. I said it's in the article you still haven't read.

Why didn't you just read it like a normal human being?

[Pavlov]

I think it's the "responsibility" of whoever wants to make a case to make a case.

Chump doesn't want to make a case.

He wants to try and make a W out of me not painstakingly reading the entirety of a poorly written long article. Par.You want to be ignorant all the time about everything.

It's not our job to fix you.

[koriwhat]

Lmao the dude who cries for everyone to do the leg work for him is now crying because someone is asking the same of him. Lefty ironic loons!

[Pavlov]

Lmao the dude who cries for everyone to do the leg work for him is now crying because someone is asking the same of him. Lefty ironic loons!:lmao I read the article.

I can't read it for him.

lol kori

[Spurtacular]

You want to be ignorant all the time about everything.

It's not our job to fix you.

We've been down this road before. Where you make a claim about stuff being in an article that isn't there; somehow, you think I'm supposed to take a liar's word though.

Also, when I asked Blakehole for the proof, he had to go to a second article; so, I highly doubt it's there as it is.

Furthermore, this was a discussion between me and someone else. If you're gonna butt in then be prepared to offer something of value. I already said that I didn't see anything when I scanned the article. You claim otherwise. Well, it's not fucking hard to copy/paste and prove your claim. In fact, I call. Cos if have to read another fucking article that has nothing cos you threw a tantrum, I'm cutting you off.

[Pavlov]

We've been down this road before. Where you make a claim about stuff being in an article that isn't there; somehow, you think I'm supposed to take a liar's word though.

Also, when I asked Blakehole for the proof, he had to go to a second article; so, I highly doubt it's there as it is.

Furthermore, this was a discussion between me and someone else. If you're gonna butt in then be prepared to offer something of value. I already said that I didn't see anything when I scanned the article. You claim otherwise. Well, it's not fucking hard to copy/paste and prove your claim. In fact, I call. Cos if have to read another fucking article that has nothing cos you threw a tantrum, I'm cutting you off.My claim is you're too stupid to read an article after I asked you what the methods were used to purge voters.

And it turns out you are really that fucking stupid.

You've been whining ever since.

But you never read the article.

You begged multiple people to do it for you.

No one here is going to cure your stupidity.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

My claim is you're too stupid to read an article after I asked you what the methods were used to purge voters.

And it turns out you are really that fucking stupid.

You've been whining ever since.

But you never read the article.

You begged multiple people to do it for you.

No one here is going to cure your stupidity.

lol derp

I said I scanned the article (meaning I read a considerable amount of it). That has nothing to do with being stupid or smart, dip shit. You're moving the goalposts.

Now then, blakehole could not or did not post any evidence from his own article. Instead he went to a different article altogether leaving me inclined to believe that
my scan yielded a good albeit it not foolproof guess.

In comes you making an issue out of nothing. So, this is your issue. Post your shit. I already called. If you don't post it, you're just being exposed as a fucking tool at this point. Hardly groundbreaking news I'll admit.

[Pavlov]

I said I scanned the article (meaning I read a considerable amount of it). That has nothing to do with being stupid or smart, dip shit. You're moving the goalposts.

Now then, blakehole could not or did not post any evidence from his own article. Instead he went to a different article altogether leaving me inclined to believe that
my scan yielded a good albeit it not foolproof guess.

In comes you making an issue out of nothing. So, this is your issue. Post your shit. I already called. If you don't post it, you're just being and/or being exposed as a liar troll at this point. Hardly groundbreaking news I'll admit.You're too stupid to just read an article you failed to scan correctly.

You're an idiot who would rather whine for an entire day than fix your own fuckup by reading a short article. Hardly groundbreaking news I'll admit.

lol derp

You will never read this short article. You want to be an ignorant dumbass out of spite.

"already called"

It's a discussion. You think it's a life and death war using stupid gambling terms.

[Chucho]

Based on how he takes rejection from his homosexual objects of desire, I feel sorry for the dude who turns derp down in real life. Queer sociopathic failure on a rampage on a Saturday.

[Spurtacular]

You're too stupid to just read an article you failed to scan correctly.

You're an idiot who would rather whine for an entire day than fix your own fuckup by reading a short article. Hardly groundbreaking news I'll admit.

lol derp

You will never read this short article. You want to be an ignorant dumbass out of spite.

"already called"

It's a discussion. You think it's a life and death war using stupid gambling terms.

:lmao A scan allows for gaps, dip shit.

Why the fuck do you think I asked the person with presumably more knowledge on the matter to post his evidence? You're calling me stupid for attempting to be time efficient (nothing you could give a fuck about in your deadbeat life).

Now again, in comes you with a claim. Well I already learned what I wanted to learn. You're the one that's making a battle out of your claim though. So, I call. Post your shit.

[Pavlov]

:lmao A scan allows for gaps, dip shit.
Yeah, your scan was a failure.

Read the article -- then you could answer the question I asked in the first place.

But rather than read for two minutes you want to whine the rest of your life.


lol derp

[Spurtacular]

Yeah, your scan was a failure.

Read the article -- then you could answer the question I asked in the first place.

But rather than read for two minutes you want to whine the rest of your life.


lol derp

:cry You lost the zero sum game :cry

This was never a reading and comprehension test, tool.

I called. You gonna show your hand or fold like a pussy?

[Pavlov]

:cry You lost the zero sum game :cry

This was never a reading and comprehension test, tool.

I called. You gonna show your hand or fold like a pussy?Called what?

I'm the one who asked the question, dumbass.

It's not a poker game.

It's not any kind of game.

It's not war.

I asked you a simple question. When you shit yourself I told you were you could find the answer. You utterly failed to find it in the exact spot I told you.

All you have to do is read the article.

You want to whine for the rest of your life.

Your choice.

lol derp

Now you're going to whine some more about my not helping you cure your ignorance.

Tough shit.

Read the article.

[Spurtacular]

Called what?


I called. Show your evidence of corruption in regards to removing the 500K names in the article that you have claimed is there.

[Pavlov]

I called.It's not a card game.

Read the article.

That's all.

Or whine more.

Your choice.

[Spurtacular]

All you have to do is read the article.


I don't though. Blakehole already made his case. The only thing on the table is you trying to make your little W about some info being in the article. So, I call.

[Spurtacular]

It's not a card game.

Read the article.

That's all.

Or whine more.

Your choice.

:lmao Folding like a pussy.

[Pavlov]

I don't though.So you're going to whine more.

OK.

Your choice.

[Pavlov]

:lmao Folding like a pussy.It's not a card game.

Read the article or whine more.

Your choice.

[Spurtacular]

So you're going to whine more.

OK.

Your choice.

Blakehole and I have already taken the matter to it's natural conclusion. I've said this multiple times.

Only after I've taken the time to beat you down do you want to let this little W matter go.

I call. Show your hand already.

[Pavlov]

Blakehole and I have already taken the matter to it's natural conclusion. I've said this multiple times.Then why are you still whining?

You really like whining.

Multiple times.

If you're done just be done.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

It's not a card game.

Read the article or whine more.

Your choice.

Stakes are already set.

Your claim about the info being in the article vs. my apparently not satisfactory scanning skills.

I call. Show your hand, or be a pussy and fold.

[Pavlov]

Stakes are already set.lol no

It's not a card game.

All you're doing is whining.

[Spurtacular]

lol no

It's not a card game.

All you're doing is whining.

:lmao Folding like a pussy.

[Pavlov]

FoldingIt's not a card game.

You already said you were done.

Now you're just whining about your failure.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

It's not a card game.

You already said you were done.

Now you're just whining about your failure.

lol derp

:cry You called my bluff :cry

:lmao Ass hat pussy has to fold.

[Pavlov]

[poker terms]lol no

Calling my bluff would be reading the article.

You're too afraid to do that.

To use your terms, you've already folded.

But please whine more about it.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

lol no

Calling my bluff would be reading the article.

You're too afraid to do that.

To use your terms, you've already folded.

lol derp

No, it's your claim (for you to list). I already listed the stakes as determined by you.

It's okay that you're a pussy. You're already used to it.

[Pavlov]

No, it's your claim (for you to list)lol no.

I asked you what methods were used to purge voters. You shit yourself and haven't stopped since.

All you have to do -- all you ever had to do -- is read the article.

Why won't you just read the article like a normal human being?

[Spurtacular]

lol no.

I asked you what methods were used to purge voters. You shit yourself and haven't stopped since.

All you have to do -- all you ever had to do -- is read the article.

Why won't you just read the article like a normal human being?

I accept that you folded at this point.

So, tell me how your little bull shit scuffles all throughout the weekend makes you cooler than someone on here on a Friday night?

[Pavlov]

Here you go:


Georgia’s strict laws lead to large purge of voters
Digging Deep Oct 27, 2018
By Alan Judd, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Efforts put voters at risk of disenfranchisement, critics say

One evening in July 2017, computers at the Georgia Secretary of State’s office were set to a monumental task. Through the night, they would sift through a list of 6.6 million registered voters, seeking out those who didn’t belong.

By dawn, more than 500,000 people were registered no more.This purge, according to election-law experts, may represent the largest mass disenfranchisement in U.S. history.It also underscores how Georgia – where people once died for the right to vote – has systematically enacted some of the strictest voting laws in the nation over the past two decades. While officials say the laws are aimed at preventing election fraud, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights says no state has done more than Georgia in recent years to make voting difficult, especially for minorities.Related: How voting issues became a big issue in Georgia’s governor race Related: Georgia stalls voter registrations, from Jesus to new U.S. citizens

These efforts went relatively unnoticed before this year’s campaign for governor. That has changed amid what appears to be a historically tight race and, perhaps more important, claims that Republicans are engaging in voter suppression.The focus on who gets to vote may have been inevitable in this election. Republican candidate Brian Kemp, the secretary of state since 2010, has avidly enforced and advocated for strict voting laws. Democrat Stacey Abrams, a former state legislator, is a long-time voting-rights activist. She also could become the first African-American woman elected governor of any state.
The points of conflict are many: An “exact match” law that put 50,000 would-be voters into electoral purgatory over even slight inconsistencies in their registration applications. The closing of voting precincts in areas with substantial African-American populations. The diversion of a busload of black senior citizens headed to the polls for early voting.Nothing, however, generated more controversy than Georgia’s massive purge, authorized by a 20-year-old law whose advocates distilled the right to vote to a pithy phrase: Use it or lose it.Since 2012, according to federal and state data, Georgia has removed about 1.4 million people from the voting rolls. Some died. Some moved away. Some lost their voting rights after being convicted of felonies.But most simply stopped participating in elections, an analysis of canceled registrations shows. They didn’t use their right to vote, so they lost it.Kemp, whose job puts him in charge of the election in which he is running, and other officials say they are following the law. Both federal and state laws require voters lists to be accurate and up to date to help maintain election integrity. Officials say saboteurs could more easily assume the identities of inactive voters than of those who cast ballots in virtually every election.But this year, the convergence of Georgia’s numerous efforts to carefully regulate voting is straining the state’s election system, said Jonathan Brater, a lawyer with the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.“The combined effect is to put voters – especially racial minorities – at risk of disenfranchisement,” Brater wrote in a blog post last week.The post’s title: “What’s the Matter with Georgia?”

‘Gateway to voting’ In 1965, before the Voting Rights Act took effect, 27.4 percent of eligible African-Americans and other minorities were registered to vote in Georgia. Three years later, that rate had almost doubled, to 52.6 percent.But in a recent report, the Commission on Civil Rights, a bipartisan federal panel, harshly criticized Georgia’s more recent treatment of minority voters.The commission listed five restrictions it considers particularly onerous: requiring government-issued photo identification to cast a ballot; requiring documentary proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate or a passport, to register; aggressive purges of inactive voters; reductions in early voting; and moving or closing polling places.Georgia is the only state that imposed all five restrictions, the commission found. The proof of citizenship law was never implemented, however.The commission’s criticism came as many states were busy revising laws that regulate voter registration – “the gateway to voting,” as Dylan Lynch of the National Conference of State Legislatures put it. Twenty-three states passed voter registration laws this year, compared to six in 2014.Many of those laws seek to make registration easier or to keep more voters eligible to cast ballots.In California, for example, lawmakers instructed election officials to communicate with newly registered voters by text or email to let them know their applications are being processed. Delaware legislators ordered that the state find a “non-discriminatory” method for identifying registered voters who may have become ineligible by moving out of state. They said the current system, the same one that Georgia and 35 other states use, relies on a change-of-address database that contains too much erroneous information.In many respects, the way Georgia maintains its voter list sits firmly in the mainstream. It is among 44 states that routinely flag inactive voters, according to the National Association of Secretaries of State. It is one of 38 states that restrict voting by people judged mentally incompetent.But in canceling the registration of people who stop participating in elections, Georgia is a definite outlier.Since 1997, it has been one of nine states that purge voters for a lack of contact with the election system. Voting-rights advocates say it is unfair to take away a citizen’s right to vote. But the U.S. Supreme Court, ruling in an Ohio case, recently upheld the practice.Regardless, said Candice Broce, a spokeswoman for Kemp’s office, “it’s not just the lack of voting” that leads to cancellation, “it’s the lack of contact.”The purge The night of July 28 last year, the secretary of state’s computers hunted for voters who were registered but far from engaged.Those voters had gone into inactive status after three years in which they had no contact with the election system. They had not updated their registrations with new addresses during that time. They had ignored mailings from their county election offices. They hadn’t signed petitions seeking to get a candidate or an issue on the ballot.And they hadn’t voted.At the end of that three years, state officials mailed these voters notices that gave them 30 days to confirm that they still wanted to be on the voting rolls. Regardless of whether they wanted to stay registered, they then failed to vote in either of the next two general elections.The 1997 law – passed when Democrats controlled the Legislature and the governor’s office, as Kemp’s office points out – instructed election officials to clean up voter lists every odd-numbered year, between statewide elections. The Secretary of State’s office did not carry out the required maintenance in 2015 because of a legal challenge, Broce, the spokeswoman, said. As a result, she said, the number of cancellations spiked in 2017.The process can take as long as seven years. But for many of the people purged in 2017, the three years without contact ended in September 2014, when that year’s early voting period concluded. Then they didn’t vote in in that year’s general election two months later, or in 2016. They went from disengaged to disenfranchised in six years.Kemp’s office has described the process as “automated.” But Broce said three officials from the office oversee the cancellations to guard against widescale errors. Kemp is not one of them.“They all have to review and sign off on the identified list of people,” Broce said.The July 2017 list identified 534,119 voters who were no longer eligible; 80 percent had not voted either in 2014 or 2016 and had had no other contact with the election system in years.Throughout 2017, the state purged 665,791 people, or about 10 percent of all registered voters. The law does not require the state to notify them of the cancellations.More than 130,000 of those purged last year had registered to vote in 2008, the year of Barrack Obama’s historic presidential candidacy. Nearly half were minorities.Officials suspect many voted for Obama that year – and never returned to the polls or made other contact with the election system.What no one knows is whether some might have been similarly motivated to vote for the first black nominee for governor in Georgia. If they go the polls this year, they’ll be turned away.The right not to vote In 2016, Common Cause and the NAACP challenged Georgia’s method of purging voters, arguing in a lawsuit that it violated a First Amendment guarantee – the right not to vote. Just like voting, the suit claimed, withholding a vote “also constitutes political speech.”“The First Amendment protects not only the right of a qualified citizen to vote,” the suit said. “It also protects the right of a citizen not to vote.”In a hearing in federal court, a lawyer for the state argued that “there is no established constitutional right to vote. But, she said, “any registered voter is free not to vote in any election they so desire.”A federal judge dismissed the suit, but an appeals court reinstated it while the Supreme Court considered the Ohio case. After the high court upheld Ohio’s voter-list procedures, the suit was dropped.So the purges stand, subject to rulings in recently filed lawsuits.How many of the hundreds of thousands of purged voters actually want to be registered is not clear.The Atlanta Journal-Constitution tried last week to get in touch with 50 people randomly chosen from the list of 2017’s purged voters. Twenty clearly would be ineligible to vote in Georgia: 17 moved out of state, two were convicted of felonies and one had died. Most of the rest left a trail of address changes and disconnected telephone numbers.For some, voting clearly is not a priority.Anthony Ervin, 52, of Decatur registered in 2008 but hasn’t voted since. He showed no surprise at the news that he had been purged from the rolls.“I don’t know nothing about it,” he said.Jenny Arter, 55, of Kingsland registered in 2010 – and never once cast a ballot. Her reasons reflect both a deep cynicism and a distinct political viewpoint.When Obama was running for president, she said, “I didn’t care.”When Donald Trump ran, “I didn’t care.”“What is the point of me voting?” Arter said, her voice rising. “They’re going to elect whoever they’re going to elect. It doesn’t matter what the people want.”She lowered her voice before adding, “That’s just the way I feel.”

I'll edit in the paragraph breaks if that'll help you.

[Spurtacular]

Why won't you just read the article like a normal human being?

I had a conversation with someone who answered my question and made the need to read the article null and void.

Also :lol that this is coming from a guy who can't be bothered to watch an 18 second video.

[Spurtacular]

Here you go:



I'll edit in the paragraph breaks if that'll help you.

Oh, you're interested in "helping"?

Cool. Copy/paste whatever claim you're trying to make.

[Pavlov]

Oh, you're interested in "helping"?

Cool. Copy/paste whatever claim you're trying to make.
Georgia’s strict laws lead to large purge of voters
Digging Deep Oct 27, 2018
By Alan Judd, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Efforts put voters at risk of disenfranchisement, critics say

One evening in July 2017, computers at the Georgia Secretary of State’s office were set to a monumental task. Through the night, they would sift through a list of 6.6 million registered voters, seeking out those who didn’t belong.

By dawn, more than 500,000 people were registered no more.

This purge, according to election-law experts, may represent the largest mass disenfranchisement in U.S. history.

It also underscores how Georgia – where people once died for the right to vote – has systematically enacted some of the strictest voting laws in the nation over the past two decades. While officials say the laws are aimed at preventing election fraud, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights says no state has done more than Georgia in recent years to make voting difficult, especially for minorities

These efforts went relatively unnoticed before this year’s campaign for governor. That has changed amid what appears to be a historically tight race and, perhaps more important, claims that Republicans are engaging in voter suppression.

The focus on who gets to vote may have been inevitable in this election. Republican candidate Brian Kemp, the secretary of state since 2010, has avidly enforced and advocated for strict voting laws. Democrat Stacey Abrams, a former state legislator, is a long-time voting-rights activist. She also could become the first African-American woman elected governor of any state.

The points of conflict are many: An “exact match” law that put 50,000 would-be voters into electoral purgatory over even slight inconsistencies in their registration applications. The closing of voting precincts in areas with substantial African-American populations. The diversion of a busload of black senior citizens headed to the polls for early voting.

Nothing, however, generated more controversy than Georgia’s massive purge, authorized by a 20-year-old law whose advocates distilled the right to vote to a pithy phrase: Use it or lose it.

Since 2012, according to federal and state data, Georgia has removed about 1.4 million people from the voting rolls. Some died. Some moved away. Some lost their voting rights after being convicted of felonies.But most simply stopped participating in elections, an analysis of canceled registrations shows. They didn’t use their right to vote, so they lost it.

Kemp, whose job puts him in charge of the election in which he is running, and other officials say they are following the law. Both federal and state laws require voters lists to be accurate and up to date to help maintain election integrity. Officials say saboteurs could more easily assume the identities of inactive voters than of those who cast ballots in virtually every election.

But this year, the convergence of Georgia’s numerous efforts to carefully regulate voting is straining the state’s election system, said Jonathan Brater, a lawyer with the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.

“The combined effect is to put voters – especially racial minorities – at risk of disenfranchisement,” Brater wrote in a blog post last week.The post’s title: “What’s the Matter with Georgia?”

‘Gateway to voting’

In 1965, before the Voting Rights Act took effect, 27.4 percent of eligible African-Americans and other minorities were registered to vote in Georgia. Three years later, that rate had almost doubled, to 52.6 percent.

But in a recent report, the Commission on Civil Rights, a bipartisan federal panel, harshly criticized Georgia’s more recent treatment of minority voters.

The commission listed five restrictions it considers particularly onerous: requiring government-issued photo identification to cast a ballot; requiring documentary proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate or a passport, to register; aggressive purges of inactive voters; reductions in early voting; and moving or closing polling places.

Georgia is the only state that imposed all five restrictions, the commission found. The proof of citizenship law was never implemented, however.

The commission’s criticism came as many states were busy revising laws that regulate voter registration – “the gateway to voting,” as Dylan Lynch of the National Conference of State Legislatures put it. Twenty-three states passed voter registration laws this year, compared to six in 2014.

Many of those laws seek to make registration easier or to keep more voters eligible to cast ballots.

In California, for example, lawmakers instructed election officials to communicate with newly registered voters by text or email to let them know their applications are being processed. Delaware legislators ordered that the state find a “non-discriminatory” method for identifying registered voters who may have become ineligible by moving out of state. They said the current system, the same one that Georgia and 35 other states use, relies on a change-of-address database that contains too much erroneous information.

In many respects, the way Georgia maintains its voter list sits firmly in the mainstream. It is among 44 states that routinely flag inactive voters, according to the National Association of Secretaries of State. It is one of 38 states that restrict voting by people judged mentally incompetent.

But in canceling the registration of people who stop participating in elections, Georgia is a definite outlier.

Since 1997, it has been one of nine states that purge voters for a lack of contact with the election system. Voting-rights advocates say it is unfair to take away a citizen’s right to vote. But the U.S. Supreme Court, ruling in an Ohio case, recently upheld the practice.

Regardless, said Candice Broce, a spokeswoman for Kemp’s office, “it’s not just the lack of voting” that leads to cancellation, “it’s the lack of contact.”

The purge

The night of July 28 last year, the secretary of state’s computers hunted for voters who were registered but far from engaged.

Those voters had gone into inactive status after three years in which they had no contact with the election system. They had not updated their registrations with new addresses during that time. They had ignored mailings from their county election offices. They hadn’t signed petitions seeking to get a candidate or an issue on the ballot.

And they hadn’t voted.

At the end of that three years, state officials mailed these voters notices that gave them 30 days to confirm that they still wanted to be on the voting rolls. Regardless of whether they wanted to stay registered, they then failed to vote in either of the next two general elections.

The 1997 law – passed when Democrats controlled the Legislature and the governor’s office, as Kemp’s office points out – instructed election officials to clean up voter lists every odd-numbered year, between statewide elections. The Secretary of State’s office did not carry out the required maintenance in 2015 because of a legal challenge, Broce, the spokeswoman, said. As a result, she said, the number of cancellations spiked in 2017.

The process can take as long as seven years. But for many of the people purged in 2017, the three years without contact ended in September 2014, when that year’s early voting period concluded. Then they didn’t vote in in that year’s general election two months later, or in 2016. They went from disengaged to disenfranchised in six years.

Kemp’s office has described the process as “automated.” But Broce said three officials from the office oversee the cancellations to guard against widescale errors. Kemp is not one of them.“They all have to review and sign off on the identified list of people,” Broce said.

The July 2017 list identified 534,119 voters who were no longer eligible; 80 percent had not voted either in 2014 or 2016 and had had no other contact with the election system in years.

Throughout 2017, the state purged 665,791 people, or about 10 percent of all registered voters. The law does not require the state to notify them of the cancellations.

More than 130,000 of those purged last year had registered to vote in 2008, the year of Barrack Obama’s historic presidential candidacy. Nearly half were minorities.

Officials suspect many voted for Obama that year – and never returned to the polls or made other contact with the election system.

What no one knows is whether some might have been similarly motivated to vote for the first black nominee for governor in Georgia. If they go the polls this year, they’ll be turned away.

The right not to vote

In 2016, Common Cause and the NAACP challenged Georgia’s method of purging voters, arguing in a lawsuit that it violated a First Amendment guarantee – the right not to vote. Just like voting, the suit claimed, withholding a vote “also constitutes political speech.”

“The First Amendment protects not only the right of a qualified citizen to vote,” the suit said. “It also protects the right of a citizen not to vote.”In a hearing in federal court, a lawyer for the state argued that “there is no established constitutional right to vote. But, she said, “any registered voter is free not to vote in any election they so desire.”

A federal judge dismissed the suit, but an appeals court reinstated it while the Supreme Court considered the Ohio case. After the high court upheld Ohio’s voter-list procedures, the suit was dropped.

So the purges stand, subject to rulings in recently filed lawsuits.How many of the hundreds of thousands of purged voters actually want to be registered is not clear.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution tried last week to get in touch with 50 people randomly chosen from the list of 2017’s purged voters. Twenty clearly would be ineligible to vote in Georgia: 17 moved out of state, two were convicted of felonies and one had died. Most of the rest left a trail of address changes and disconnected telephone numbers.

For some, voting clearly is not a priority.

Anthony Ervin, 52, of Decatur registered in 2008 but hasn’t voted since. He showed no surprise at the news that he had been purged from the rolls.

“I don’t know nothing about it,” he said.

Jenny Arter, 55, of Kingsland registered in 2010 – and never once cast a ballot. Her reasons reflect both a deep cynicism and a distinct political viewpoint.

When Obama was running for president, she said, “I didn’t care.”

When Donald Trump ran, “I didn’t care.”

“What is the point of me voting?” Arter said, her voice rising. “They’re going to elect whoever they’re going to elect. It doesn’t matter what the people want.”

She lowered her voice before adding, “That’s just the way I feel.”

You gonna read it?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

You gonna read it?

Yes or no.

:lmao You spent time parsing each paragraph instead of just copy/pasting.

Do you really think that acting like a brat is the way to get quality W's?

[Pavlov]

:lmao You spent time parsing each paragraph instead of just copy/pasting.

Do you really think that acting like a brat is the way to get quality W's?So you fold.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

So you fold.

lol derp

How can I fold if I called?

It's your claim. Show your cards.

[Pavlov]

How can I fold if I called?

It's your claim. Show your cards.I did.

If you don't bother to read the cards you can't win.

Read 'em.

[Spurtacular]

I did.

If you don't bother to read the cards you can't win.

Read 'em.

It's not my job to do your work or play your games. This is you're issue; step up.

[Pavlov]

:lol It's not my job to do your work or play your games. This is you're issue; step up.It's not my job to read my cards for you.

I showed my cards.

You ran away from the table without reading them.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

I did.

If you don't bother to read the cards you can't win.

Read 'em.

Your cards are the copy/paste your evidence. It's not my job to prove your claim for you.

:lmao Psychopav

[Pavlov]

Your cards are the copy/paste your evidence. It's not my job to prove your claim for you.

:lmao PsychopavI proved it.

The information is in the article just like I said.

It's not my job to read it for you.

That is all.

[Spurtacular]

I proved it.

The information is in the article just like I said.

It's not my job to read it for you.

That is all.

You proved that you can post a full article and make a claim that info is in it.

[Pavlov]

You proved that you can post a full article and make a claim that info is in it.Actually, I claimed the information is in the article then posted the article for everyone to see the information is indeed in the article.

So my job is done.

Sorry derp.

[Spurtacular]

Actually, I claimed the information is in the article then posted the article for everyone to see the information is indeed in the article.

So my job is done.

Sorry derp.

There is nothing in that article that supports 500K voters were illegally removed. This is why you're being a chicken shit coward and trying to pretend posting a full article is an acceptable means of proving your claim.

[Pavlov]

There is nothing in that article that supports 500K voters were illegally removed.No one said it was illegal.

You made yet another straw man.