Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(PBS)   You are not going to believe this, but that Georgia runoff election law was created in the '60s as a way to keep any candidate favored by those "uppity people" away from power, without running afoul of federal law   (pbs.org) divider line
    More: Obvious, Voting system, Plurality voting system, Voting, Elections, Voter turnout, Election, PBS NewsHour's Nicole Ellis, Black candidates  
•       •       •

2645 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Dec 2022 at 11:20 AM (8 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



66 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-12-04 8:31:46 AM  
"This" I'm not hopeful about the state where people elected MTG not wanting to be embarrassed and disempowered for the next 6 yrs.
 
2022-12-04 9:14:39 AM  
Yes.., I thought everyone knew that.
 
2022-12-04 11:24:25 AM  
I mean... It's Georgia.
 
2022-12-04 11:28:37 AM  
Literally everyone knew that already.
 
2022-12-04 11:29:30 AM  
I'm sure it may seem that way citizen, but none other than the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that voting rights have been fully restored and there are no shenanigans occurring, so you must be mistaken.

Carry on citizen.

\pick up that can
 
2022-12-04 11:29:32 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-12-04 11:36:02 AM  
Q: Why is X the case in the US?
A: Racism

Let X = U
 
2022-12-04 11:36:30 AM  
Someone fetch me a fainting couch I think I have the vapors.
 
2022-12-04 11:39:04 AM  
Anything that Georgia does to prevent non-Uncle Ruckuses from gaining political positions is oKKK for the Supreme Court.
 
2022-12-04 11:40:46 AM  
Guaranteed to succeed this time, I guess.
 
2022-12-04 11:42:43 AM  
Chief Justice John Roberts has made it clear that racial bias is not a factor in elections.
 
2022-12-04 11:46:43 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Azz
2022-12-04 11:48:14 AM  
was introduced by a staunch segregationist legislator named Denmark Groover

If he wasn't closeted with a name like that I'll set my left testicle on fire
 
2022-12-04 11:48:25 AM  
This coming Tuesday, the next senator from Georgia will likely be picked by whichever party turns out in greater numbers to vote.

youdontsay.jpg
 
2022-12-04 11:48:32 AM  
"Denmark Groover"

Sounds like a stage name.

M-ssst m-ssst m-ssst m-ssst
"Alas p p p p poor Yorick ck ck ck"
M-ssst m-ssst m-ssst m-ssst
 
2022-12-04 11:51:52 AM  
Pretty sure I am going to believe this.
 
2022-12-04 11:56:19 AM  
It's almost like all voting laws are racist 🤔
 
2022-12-04 12:02:51 PM  
They could structure it as an instant runoff and save everyone tons of time & money. But that wouldn't pull out the poor white angry racist hilljack vote every time a black person gets close to the levers of power.
 
2022-12-04 12:04:39 PM  
You mean the state that had a big debate and stink over the confederate battle flag on their state flag has racist voting laws? Get the hell outta here. But at least they changed the flag.
 
2022-12-04 12:06:05 PM  

DoctorCal: "Denmark Groover"

Sounds like a stage name.

M-ssst m-ssst m-ssst m-ssst
"Alas p p p p poor Yorick ck ck ck"
M-ssst m-ssst m-ssst m-ssst


More like "Denvark Groomer", amirite?

// everyone I don't like is a groomer, yes? that's how politics works now?
// anyway, fark that guy's memory
 
2022-12-04 12:07:08 PM  
And sadly, it's working. It's going to keep a fine African-American man like Herschel Walker from taking office. Sad!
 
2022-12-04 12:09:34 PM  
This whole thread has veered into critical race theory.
 
2022-12-04 12:11:37 PM  

Yakk: This whole thread has veered into critical race theory.


did anyone ever find out what critical race theory is
 
rpm
2022-12-04 12:15:04 PM  

Azz: I'll set my left testicle on fire


Fark is not your personal erotica site.
 
2022-12-04 12:17:42 PM  
Here's the thing though... Runoff elections or ranked choice voting both seem more fair than than the way most states do it.
 
2022-12-04 12:18:11 PM  

moothemagiccow: Yakk: This whole thread has veered into critical race theory.

did anyone ever find out what critical race theory is


Teaching history without whitewashing it.
 
2022-12-04 12:18:11 PM  
Does this mean instant runoff elections are racially biased, too?

GregInIndy has a good point. The difference would be the current method in Georgia allows people to vote in the runoff who didn't feel the need in the general. Does that difference make one version racist and the other not?
 
2022-12-04 12:18:32 PM  
My guy didn't win?  Well, let's give him a second chance.
 
2022-12-04 12:18:35 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-12-04 12:19:22 PM  

moothemagiccow: Yakk: This whole thread has veered into critical race theory.

did anyone ever find out what critical race theory is


Has something to do with Formula 1 vs. Indy Car vs. NASCAR.
 
2022-12-04 12:21:11 PM  

rpm: Azz: I'll set my left testicle on fire

Fark is not your personal erotica site.



Yeah, don't bogart the erotica site, dude.
 
2022-12-04 12:21:57 PM  

Azz: was introduced by a staunch segregationist legislator named Denmark Groover


Wikipedia has very little on him as a segregationist legislator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark_Groover_Jr.

It doesn't even have the photo of him trying to stop the clock from running out on a redistricting session..

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-12-04 12:22:38 PM  

tedduque: Does this mean instant runoff elections are racially biased, too?

GregInIndy has a good point. The difference would be the current method in Georgia allows people to vote in the runoff who didn't feel the need in the general. Does that difference make one version racist and the other not?


When one party can do things to make voting more difficult for the other, yes.  Specifically, the Georgia SoS tried to outlaw voting the Saturday after Thanksgiving, with no reason given and in conflict with precedent.
 
2022-12-04 12:24:40 PM  
They must be pissed that they have to put on another election for two black guys.
 
2022-12-04 12:25:38 PM  
Since the 1960s, Georgia's majority voting law has required a candidate get 50 percent of the vote or more in order to be declared the winner, and was introduced by a staunch segregationist legislator named Denmark Groover.

Denmark Groover?

Danish House Music Exclusive Mix
Youtube Uc83WZG4f1o
 
2022-12-04 12:34:15 PM  

foo monkey: tedduque: Does this mean instant runoff elections are racially biased, too?

GregInIndy has a good point. The difference would be the current method in Georgia allows people to vote in the runoff who didn't feel the need in the general. Does that difference make one version racist and the other not?

When one party can do things to make voting more difficult for the other, yes.  Specifically, the Georgia SoS tried to outlaw voting the Saturday after Thanksgiving, with no reason given and in conflict with precedent.


You haven't been paying attention if you seriously think the SoS did it with no reason.

His rationale was all kinds of wrong as evidenced by the fact it was reversed, but hyperbole like this is why arguments about how racist the Rs are, particularly in the South, are dismissed out of handle. Baseless, obviously wrong statements do not help. At all. Stop it. Please.
 
2022-12-04 12:34:29 PM  
I mean, I think you can just safely assume that, if you ever wonder why any voting law in the South is the way it is, the answer is racism.
 
2022-12-04 12:38:11 PM  

mistahtom: It's almost like all voting laws are racist 🤔


I've gotten tired of trying to explain to people in f*cking RHODE ISLAND how stupid voter ID is. These idiots all fell for it.

It's an easy argument to make for it, if you just don't think about any of the reasons like... what widespread voter fraud?

Every element they can add to make voting harder helps the GOP. But they are not changing it here.
 
2022-12-04 12:39:17 PM  

tedduque: Does this mean instant runoff elections are racially biased, too?

GregInIndy has a good point. The difference would be the current method in Georgia allows people to vote in the runoff who didn't feel the need in the general. Does that difference make one version racist and the other not?


From the article:
When so-called "white-only primary" elections were deemed unconstitutional in 1946, Black voter registration surged across the South, including in Georgia. In 1940, an estimated 250,000 Black southerners were registered to vote and that number rose to 775,000 by 1948, according to data from the National Park Service.

When Groover lost reelection to the Georgia House of Representatives in 1958 despite winning the majority of the white vote, data from segregated polling places in Macon revealed that Black voters contributed to the upset victory by his opponent, Kousser said. In his book, "Colorblind Injustice: Minority Voting Rights and the Undoing of the Second Reconstruction," Kousser writes that Groover's opponent "triumphed by garnering black ballots by a five-to-one margin."

Two decades after introducing majority vote legislation, Groover left very little to mystery to his motives, stating in a deposition, "I was a segregationist. I was a county unit man. But if you want to establish if I was racially prejudiced, I was. If you want to establish that some of my political activity was racially motivated, it was."

Did he stutter?
 
2022-12-04 12:40:52 PM  
So Raffensperger was the one to make this argument which Warnock had to sue Georgia for. And Kemp is campaigning for Walker.

I've been seeing here on Fark that some of the Republicans in Georgia are moderate and okay. They're not. Raffensperger recorded that Trump tape to protect himself, and Kemp just didn't want to scare moderates away until after he secured his own win against Abrams.

The political mood in Georgia still sucks.

Oh and my anti-vax rep Loudermilk who never vaccinated his daughters won again. You know, the guy who held that tour the day before Jan 6.
 
2022-12-04 12:48:20 PM  

groppet: You mean the state that had a big debate and stink over the confederate battle flag on their state flag has racist voting laws? Get the hell outta here. But at least they changed the flag.


...to another Confederate flag.
 
2022-12-04 1:07:39 PM  

Urmuf Hamer: "This" I'm not hopeful about the state where people elected MTG not wanting to be embarrassed and disempowered for the next 6 yrs.


MTG represents the crazy north GA mountain people. Most of us here live around Atlanta and are relatively sane.
And hate her.
 
2022-12-04 1:15:30 PM  

HighOnCraic: tedduque: Does this mean instant runoff elections are racially biased, too?

GregInIndy has a good point. The difference would be the current method in Georgia allows people to vote in the runoff who didn't feel the need in the general. Does that difference make one version racist and the other not?

From the article:
When so-called "white-only primary" elections were deemed unconstitutional in 1946, Black voter registration surged across the South, including in Georgia. In 1940, an estimated 250,000 Black southerners were registered to vote and that number rose to 775,000 by 1948, according to data from the National Park Service.

When Groover lost reelection to the Georgia House of Representatives in 1958 despite winning the majority of the white vote, data from segregated polling places in Macon revealed that Black voters contributed to the upset victory by his opponent, Kousser said. In his book, "Colorblind Injustice: Minority Voting Rights and the Undoing of the Second Reconstruction," Kousser writes that Groover's opponent "triumphed by garnering black ballots by a five-to-one margin."

Two decades after introducing majority vote legislation, Groover left very little to mystery to his motives, stating in a deposition, "I was a segregationist. I was a county unit man. But if you want to establish if I was racially prejudiced, I was. If you want to establish that some of my political activity was racially motivated, it was."

Did he stutter?


Nope. Clearly there is a strong argument that runoff elections are racially biased. I asked why instant runoff elections aren't if this form of a runoff election clearly is. Did I stutter?
 
2022-12-04 1:19:16 PM  

Drubell: So Raffensperger was the one to make this argument which Warnock had to sue Georgia for. And Kemp is campaigning for Walker.

I've been seeing here on Fark that some of the Republicans in Georgia are moderate and okay. They're not. Raffensperger recorded that Trump tape to protect himself, and Kemp just didn't want to scare moderates away until after he secured his own win against Abrams.

The political mood in Georgia still sucks.

Oh and my anti-vax rep Loudermilk who never vaccinated his daughters won again. You know, the guy who held that tour the day before Jan 6.


Similar to other major metro areas, as the nation moved left on social issues while the Republican party didn't, traditional Republican voters in the suburbs began voting for Democrats. That's what you have going on right now in Georgia -- in the suburban Atlanta counties, a lot of the people who voted for McCain in 2008 and then Romney in 2012 are voting for Democrats in state-wide, federal elections.

The long-term good news about Georgia is that the Atlanta metro area is one of the fastest growing metro areas in the nation, while the deep red, rural counties are all losing population. The demographic changes are so rapid -- not just the state becoming more racially diverse, but also younger and more educated thanks to many major corporations opening offices in the ATL are -- that even with gerrymander, the Republican grip on the state is crumbling.
 
2022-12-04 1:22:34 PM  

tedduque: Does this mean instant runoff elections are racially biased, too?


The policy was never formally racially biased, but rather enacted because  the demographics of the time made it functionally so.

As to whether instant runoffs could have a similar impact, yes it could. If the majority of your electorate finds someone distasteful, they are unlikely to come out on top of elections that require a majority. If the majority is racist, they will find the minority candidate distasteful and rate them lowly.

The big differences between instant and separate runoff are the fact that someone can vote their conscience first round without having to worry about explicitly advancing their runoff choice( because second and third choices matter before there are 2 candidates) and the fact that candidates have to turn out voters twice instead of just once.
 
2022-12-04 1:27:15 PM  

moothemagiccow: Yakk: This whole thread has veered into critical race theory.

did anyone ever find out what critical race theory is


The racist we found along the way?
 
2022-12-04 1:40:21 PM  

tedduque: HighOnCraic: tedduque: Does this mean instant runoff elections are racially biased, too?

GregInIndy has a good point. The difference would be the current method in Georgia allows people to vote in the runoff who didn't feel the need in the general. Does that difference make one version racist and the other not?

From the article:
When so-called "white-only primary" elections were deemed unconstitutional in 1946, Black voter registration surged across the South, including in Georgia. In 1940, an estimated 250,000 Black southerners were registered to vote and that number rose to 775,000 by 1948, according to data from the National Park Service.

When Groover lost reelection to the Georgia House of Representatives in 1958 despite winning the majority of the white vote, data from segregated polling places in Macon revealed that Black voters contributed to the upset victory by his opponent, Kousser said. In his book, "Colorblind Injustice: Minority Voting Rights and the Undoing of the Second Reconstruction," Kousser writes that Groover's opponent "triumphed by garnering black ballots by a five-to-one margin."

Two decades after introducing majority vote legislation, Groover left very little to mystery to his motives, stating in a deposition, "I was a segregationist. I was a county unit man. But if you want to establish if I was racially prejudiced, I was. If you want to establish that some of my political activity was racially motivated, it was."

Did he stutter?

Nope. Clearly there is a strong argument that runoff elections are racially biased. I asked why instant runoff elections aren't if this form of a runoff election clearly is. Did I stutter?


What's wrong with the way every other state (except for Georgia and Louisiana) does it?

Two states-Georgia and Louisiana-require runoff elections in a general election when no candidate receives a majority of the vote. In every other state, a candidate can win a general election with a plurality of the vote.

https://ballotpedia.org/Runoff_election
 
DVD
2022-12-04 1:47:59 PM  
"Instant Runoff" sounds as though Ranked Choice voting already has that taken care of?

I suppose I need to read more on how Ranked Choice voting works once my choices are made?
 
2022-12-04 1:50:50 PM  

HighOnCraic: tedduque: Does this mean instant runoff elections are racially biased, too?

GregInIndy has a good point. The difference would be the current method in Georgia allows people to vote in the runoff who didn't feel the need in the general. Does that difference make one version racist and the other not?

From the article:
When so-called "white-only primary" elections were deemed unconstitutional in 1946, Black voter registration surged across the South, including in Georgia. In 1940, an estimated 250,000 Black southerners were registered to vote and that number rose to 775,000 by 1948, according to data from the National Park Service.

When Groover lost reelection to the Georgia House of Representatives in 1958 despite winning the majority of the white vote, data from segregated polling places in Macon revealed that Black voters contributed to the upset victory by his opponent, Kousser said. In his book, "Colorblind Injustice: Minority Voting Rights and the Undoing of the Second Reconstruction," Kousser writes that Groover's opponent "triumphed by garnering black ballots by a five-to-one margin."

Two decades after introducing majority vote legislation, Groover left very little to mystery to his motives, stating in a deposition, "I was a segregationist. I was a county unit man. But if you want to establish if I was racially prejudiced, I was. If you want to establish that some of my political activity was racially motivated, it was."

Did he stutter?

Racist origins aside, requiring a majority winner can be a good thing. You could have a sizable minority elect an actual KKKer if there were enough non-KKKers running against him that they split the vote and none of them got as many votes, even if the overwhelming supermajority of the voters strongly opposed the KKKer, if those didn't band together behind a single opposition candidate.

Say you have five candidates in the primary. The KKKer gets 21% of the vote (a little over ⅕ of the population of the state or whatever being racists). and the others get 20½%, 20%, 19½%, and 19%. That's 100%. 79% of the voters voted against the KKKer ― almost quadruple as many as the KKKer, yet he'd still win under a plurality system with no runoffs, despite getting only a little over ⅕ of the total vote.

Under a majority runoff system, the KKKer faces the 20½% candidate and now the non-racist nearly ⅘ supermajority of voters who oppose the KKKer have only one candidate to band together behind. Assuming the same turnout and that supporting or opposing the KKKer was the deciding motivation for the electorate, KKKer still gets 26% but the non-KKer gets 79% and wins overwhelmingly. The actual vote might be more like 30%−70%.

Urmuf Hamer: "This" I'm not hopeful about the state where people elected MTG not wanting to be embarrassed and disempowered for the next 6 yrs.

Jumbled: I mean... It's Georgia.

DarkSoulNoHope: Anything that Georgia does to prevent non-Uncle Ruckuses from gaining political positions is oKKK for the Supreme Court.

We're talking about the state that was second-to-last (Mississippi was the last) to remove the Confederate Battle Flag from their state flag, and the only one with the chutzpah to replace it with a real flag of the Confederacy (the true "Stars-and-Bars," with the only change being their State Seal slapped inside the circle of stars), figuring that most people wouldn't notice.
1.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size
 
2022-12-04 1:53:41 PM  

The Reverend Sam Hill: groppet: You mean the state that had a big debate and stink over the confederate battle flag on their state flag has racist voting laws? Get the hell outta here. But at least they changed the flag.

...to another Confederate flag.


The only one that mattered?

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Displayed 50 of 66 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.