New Texas voter restrictions based on "purity of the ballot box". Guess what that means?

[HomerJS]

Link?

Georgia House Republicans push to ban Sunday early voting - ABC News (go.com)

 

[darkswordsman17]

I'm guessing they're be a "sorry some people were upset" apology if there is any at all.

No question these people know how to throw a bone to the people that support them. They may not be good at governing, but the GOP is VERY good at dog-whistling.

Which tells you everything you need to know about their supporters/voters.

 

[blackangst1]

Georgia House Republicans push to ban Sunday early voting - ABC News (go.com)

Amazing.

 

[Amol S.]

That phrase has an ugly history in the state of Texas which is why they chose it. They tried to claim ignorance but we all know what this is about

https://twitter.com/x/status/1390494633579384832

The Republican that crafted this new law if being question by Rep. Rafael Anchcia

Rep. Rafael Anchia schools Republicans after 'purity of the ballot box' bill - TheGrio

Following is one of the responses to Rep. Rafael Anchia's tweet.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1391081581004083205

 

[Amol S.]

Wait a minute... majority of small counties in Texas are Republican, and the inhabitants of those counties live very far apart. If those inhabitants forget to vote by mail because they never receive an application, it would mean less votes for Republicans. Maybe this law is not that bad after all. Maybe the person Rafeal is schooling is a good guy, who is trying to purify the ballot box from racists.

 

[GoodRevrnd]

I tend to think Cain didnt know of the history of the phrase (I doubt many of us did before reading about this week. I know I didnt know.).

"“I guess I thought purity meaning ‘not having fraud in it’ or something,” he told Anchía.

But, I know its popular to interpret anything a Republican says or does as racist, so theres that. But until proven otherwise, I tend to take people at their word, no matter who they are. With that said, if Cain has a history of saying or doing racist things, then yeah. Id say he lied through his teetch.

I had zero knowledge of the phrase's context in Texas history but "purity" is a poisoned word that any reasonable person would associate with racial supremacy. It takes half a brain cell to come up with a neutral term like "ballot integrity" instead.

 

[Amol S.]

So I saw this reply to the comment on the video.
https:%2f%2fwww.youtube.com/watch?v=IO15kTVIVXA&lc=UgxLsb_5uajqIw5gvkZ4AaABAg.9NIEsjJvZ3e9NIHQDhgZy1

 

[Wreckem]

Why did you quote my post from another thread in this one? Lol

It was accidental.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I had zero knowledge of the phrase's context in Texas history but "purity" is a poisoned word that any reasonable person would associate with racial supremacy. It takes half a brain cell to come up with a neutral term like "ballot integrity" instead.

Huh? Whuh? You're the racist for pointing this out. - GOP

 

[Jaskalas]

New Texas voter restrictions based on "purity of the ballot box". Guess what that means?

Given the likely narratives on who is disenfranchised when voting is regulated, the question answered itself. Upon clicking the topic, my guess was correct.

If the words "purity of the ballot" have history, that's one thing. If it is still found in Texas law... that's another. You make assumptions upon which well was drawn from. Whether you are mischaracterizing it and merely hating the "other" for yet another topic, remains to be seen. You may have a legitimate point for this one. I'll leave it at that, and trust the locals to dig into it.

That the Texas GOP immediately replaced that phrase is interesting. Clearly not a hill they are interested in fighting on. Do you view the world as anything other than racist dog whistles? Because if they had intent behind it, why abandon the second it is called out? Why readily attribute to malice to that which can also be explained by ignorance and or stupidity?

 

[IronWing]

Given the likely narratives on who is disenfranchised when voting is regulated, the question answered itself. Upon clicking the topic, my guess was correct.

If the words "purity of the ballot" have history, that's one thing. If it is still found in Texas law... that's another. You make assumptions upon which well was drawn from. Whether you are mischaracterizing it and merely hating the "other" for yet another topic, remains to be seen. You may have a legitimate point for this one. I'll leave it at that, and trust the locals to dig into it.

That the Texas GOP immediately replaced that phrase is interesting. Clearly not a hill they are interested in fighting on. Do you view the world as anything other than racist dog whistles? Because if they had intent behind it, why abandon the second it is called out? Why readily attribute to malice to that which can also be explained by ignorance and or stupidity?

They changed the phrase, not the intent and substance of the law. The intent and substance is still to disenfranchise voters with a disproportionate share of those to be disenfranchised voters being black.

 

[hal2kilo]

They changed the phrase, not the intent and substance of the law. The intent and substance is still to disenfranchise voters with a disproportionate share of those to be disenfranchised voters being black.

Back to Jim Crow in other words.

 

[nickqt]

Given the likely narratives on who is disenfranchised when voting is regulated, the question answered itself. Upon clicking the topic, my guess was correct.

If the words "purity of the ballot" have history, that's one thing. If it is still found in Texas law... that's another. You make assumptions upon which well was drawn from. Whether you are mischaracterizing it and merely hating the "other" for yet another topic, remains to be seen. You may have a legitimate point for this one. I'll leave it at that, and trust the locals to dig into it.

That the Texas GOP immediately replaced that phrase is interesting. Clearly not a hill they are interested in fighting on. Do you view the world as anything other than racist dog whistles? Because if they had intent behind it, why abandon the second it is called out? Why readily attribute to malice to that which can also be explained by ignorance and or stupidity?

Falling back into the habit of defending Republican racists isn't something that makes you serious, it's more akin to a destructive drug addiction.

Why assume that Republicans are just ignorant and stupid when it's been shown that being ignorant and stupid is almost always the pillars upon which racism is built?

Yikes.

 

[HomerJS]

Given the likely narratives on who is disenfranchised when voting is regulated, the question answered itself. Upon clicking the topic, my guess was correct.

If the words "purity of the ballot" have history, that's one thing. If it is still found in Texas law... that's another. You make assumptions upon which well was drawn from. Whether you are mischaracterizing it and merely hating the "other" for yet another topic, remains to be seen. You may have a legitimate point for this one. I'll leave it at that, and trust the locals to dig into it.

That the Texas GOP immediately replaced that phrase is interesting. Clearly not a hill they are interested in fighting on. Do you view the world as anything other than racist dog whistles? Because if they had intent behind it, why abandon the second it is called out? Why readily attribute to malice to that which can also be explained by ignorance and or stupidity?

I suggest you go back and read thoroughly the art of the dog whistle. Claiming I see everything through that lens is such a strawman. I give you hard evidence and you ignore it at your choosing. Another example, do you have any doubt who GA Republicans were trying to hurt when they attempted to ban Sunday voting? They tried to slip it in until too much heat was put on it. They knew who it would hurt. I'll ask your question in reverse, why did they try it?

 

[Meghan54]

Given the likely narratives on who is disenfranchised when voting is regulated, the question answered itself. Upon clicking the topic, my guess was correct.

If the words "purity of the ballot" have history, that's one thing. If it is still found in Texas law... that's another. You make assumptions upon which well was drawn from. Whether you are mischaracterizing it and merely hating the "other" for yet another topic, remains to be seen. You may have a legitimate point for this one. I'll leave it at that, and trust the locals to dig into it.

That the Texas GOP immediately replaced that phrase is interesting. Clearly not a hill they are interested in fighting on. Do you view the world as anything other than racist dog whistles? Because if they had intent behind it, why abandon the second it is called out? Why readily attribute to malice to that which can also be explained by ignorance and or stupidity?

Are you really this stupid and igorant or do you just play that part on this forum? It seems it's no act, coming from you, so ignorant stupidity seems to be the answer.