ES&S downplays problems w/ its voting machines. To know what occurred, we need public records requests. @RGarella did one in 2019 & found that, “‘poll workers & technicians reported issues with the new machines at more than 40 % of polling locations,’...1/
More from Jennifer Cohn ✍🏻 📢
IMO, the #SAFEAct is better on election security than HR1 bc it wld ban most touchscreen voting machines currently available. HR1 wld allow them as a primary in person system bc vendors call the paper they spit out a “paper ballot.” Pen & paper is safer #HandMarkedPaperBallots 1/
I have not looked at other aspects of HR1. It addresses more than election security. The #SAFEAct shld be the starting point for election security reform in my opinion. 2/
HR1 requires that all voters have the option to mark their ballots by hand. But it does not specify that, for jurisdictions with in person voting, the hand marked (pen & paper) option must be available for in person voting (vs it only being an option w/ vote by mail). 3/
HR1 may still be a good start. But it does not go nearly far enough on election security. Here are my suggestions for election security. Maybe these could be addressed in a later bill, but we shld keep them on our radar. 4/ https://t.co/mNdHrvwHcN
The key section is 1502. IMO, it shld add the following. “For jurisdictions that offer in person voting, the option to mark a paper ballot by hand must be offered at the in-person polling location; giving this option only for vote by mail won’t suffice for such jurisdictions.” 5/
Even HR1 did not require that jurisdictions give all voters the option to mark their ballots by hand AT THE POLLS. The House has not even warned the public about the dangers of new touchscreen ballot marking devices. Pls do that NOW. TY.
— Jennifer Cohn \u270d\U0001f3fb \U0001f4e2 (@jennycohn1) April 24, 2019
Expert Report: https://t.co/I2EWvFIQEH pic.twitter.com/euekDq65mr
I have not looked at other aspects of HR1. It addresses more than election security. The #SAFEAct shld be the starting point for election security reform in my opinion. 2/
HR1 requires that all voters have the option to mark their ballots by hand. But it does not specify that, for jurisdictions with in person voting, the hand marked (pen & paper) option must be available for in person voting (vs it only being an option w/ vote by mail). 3/
HR1 may still be a good start. But it does not go nearly far enough on election security. Here are my suggestions for election security. Maybe these could be addressed in a later bill, but we shld keep them on our radar. 4/ https://t.co/mNdHrvwHcN
The key section is 1502. IMO, it shld add the following. “For jurisdictions that offer in person voting, the option to mark a paper ballot by hand must be offered at the in-person polling location; giving this option only for vote by mail won’t suffice for such jurisdictions.” 5/
More from Politics
I think a plausible explanation is that whatever Corbyn says or does, his critics will denounce - no matter how much hypocrisy it necessitates.
Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel
He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:
He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:
He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party
One of the oddest features of the Labour tax row is how raising allowances, which the media allowed the LDs to describe as progressive (in spite of evidence to contrary) through the coalition years, is now seen by everyone as very right wing
— Tom Clark (@prospect_clark) November 2, 2018
Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel
He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:
He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:
He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party
I told you they’d bring this up
I was wondering why that tweet had so many stupid replies. And now I see
Seriously, this was “the night before.” If you’re at the march where they’re changing “Jews will not replace us” and “Blood and soil,” you’re not a “very fine person.” Full stop.
There are 3 important moments in that transcript.
1.) When someone asked Trump about a statement *he had already made* about there being blame on “both sides,” he said the “fine people” line.
2. Trump does clarify! “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists — because they should be condemned totally “
Okay!
Then adds that there were “many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists.”
Right-wing media have essentially convinced themselves that Trump never said "very fine people." They're lying. https://t.co/5960NPMYLJ
— Parker Molloy (@ParkerMolloy) February 11, 2021
I was wondering why that tweet had so many stupid replies. And now I see
The Fine People Hoaxers are trying hard to keep you from reading the actual FULL transcript because then you would see how the hoax was pulled off with devious editing. https://t.co/PQLj0DWuPj
— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) February 11, 2021
Seriously, this was “the night before.” If you’re at the march where they’re changing “Jews will not replace us” and “Blood and soil,” you’re not a “very fine person.” Full stop.
Trump defense talking about how the then-president was praising the peaceful protests at Charlottesville that occurred "the night before" the violence on Saturday. That was the night where the torch-bearing crowd chanted "Jews will not replace us." pic.twitter.com/HCKS6Q9LBY
— Anthony Zurcher (@awzurcher) February 12, 2021
There are 3 important moments in that transcript.
1.) When someone asked Trump about a statement *he had already made* about there being blame on “both sides,” he said the “fine people” line.
2. Trump does clarify! “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists — because they should be condemned totally “
Okay!
Then adds that there were “many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists.”
