Posted on Apr 2, 2021
'Cracks Me Up': Laughing Fox & Friends Hosts Gang Up to Mock Georgia Voters Banned From Being...
925
20
11
5
5
0
All three “Fox & Friends” hosts Thursday morning in a jovial segment laughed at and mocked Georgia voters after Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed a law designed to disenfranchise voters that bans anyone from giving water to people standing in line to vote. In 2020 some Georgia voters stood in line for 11 hours to cast their ballots. Those voters forced to stand in long lines are mostly “in nonwhite neighborhoods,” according to a ProPublica report.
But an 11-hour wait to participate in democracy is just another joke to the conservative co-hosts on Fox News.
But an 11-hour wait to participate in democracy is just another joke to the conservative co-hosts on Fox News.
'Cracks Me Up': Laughing Fox & Friends Hosts Gang Up to Mock Georgia Voters Banned From Being...
Posted from thenewcivilrightsmovement.com
Fox News Channel
Voting
Elections
Conservative
Edited 3 y ago
Posted 3 y ago
Responses: 3
4
4
0
Republicans know they lose when there is high legal voter turnout. The only way for them to have a chance is to suppress voting and hope to get a electoral college victory.
(4)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
It's funny. Republicans overwhelmingly are elected to the governorship and to state houses and senates. And yet, somehow, you believe that the only way Republicans can win is suppressing the vote. They have won, and continue to win, in everyday America.
Republicans do NOT need to suppress the vote to win. They just need to run an actually worthy candidate. Trump was a lousy candidate and the only reason he won in 2016 is because Hillary was even worse.
Republicans do NOT need to suppress the vote to win. They just need to run an actually worthy candidate. Trump was a lousy candidate and the only reason he won in 2016 is because Hillary was even worse.
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
SFC Casey O'Mally they are not winning now that is for sure. This is a new twisted breed. Hopefully the gop continues to destroy themselves.
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
1SG (Join to see) - Again, Republicans ARE winning in everyday America. They are winning in state houses, state senates, governorships, mayorships, and pretty much all state and local elected positions. Those are facts. What follows is my opinion.
On the national scale, there are exactly two reasons they are not winning: Lack of top-of-the-ticket worthy candidates, and gerrymandering.
The last truly electable Republican Presidential nominee, in my opinion, was McCain, but he sabotaged himself with Palin - and running against the VERY charismatic Barrack Obama who ALSO had the "first Black President" storyline behind him was just too steep a hill to climb.
And I will admit that Republicans ALSO benefit quite strongly from gerrymandering. However, in the 2020 election, there were 190 "safe seats" for Democrats and 145 "safe seats" for Republicans.
https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/house
On the national scale, it isn't that Democrats have some insurmountable edge, it is simply that the Republicans keep shooting themselves in the foot. They can ABSOLUTELY win a fair and free election - if they run worthwhile TRULY Republican (small government, lower taxes, pro-business without ignoring the middle class, pro-individual liberty, strong foreign policy without being a bully, etc.) candidates. But they don't seem willing to vote for those folks in the primary, which is DEFINITELY a problem for the Republican party.
(As a note - I am a registered independent, NOT a Republican. I am, however, conservative, and tend to vote R more than D, but voted D almost as much as R up and down the ballot in 2020.)
On the national scale, there are exactly two reasons they are not winning: Lack of top-of-the-ticket worthy candidates, and gerrymandering.
The last truly electable Republican Presidential nominee, in my opinion, was McCain, but he sabotaged himself with Palin - and running against the VERY charismatic Barrack Obama who ALSO had the "first Black President" storyline behind him was just too steep a hill to climb.
And I will admit that Republicans ALSO benefit quite strongly from gerrymandering. However, in the 2020 election, there were 190 "safe seats" for Democrats and 145 "safe seats" for Republicans.
https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/house
On the national scale, it isn't that Democrats have some insurmountable edge, it is simply that the Republicans keep shooting themselves in the foot. They can ABSOLUTELY win a fair and free election - if they run worthwhile TRULY Republican (small government, lower taxes, pro-business without ignoring the middle class, pro-individual liberty, strong foreign policy without being a bully, etc.) candidates. But they don't seem willing to vote for those folks in the primary, which is DEFINITELY a problem for the Republican party.
(As a note - I am a registered independent, NOT a Republican. I am, however, conservative, and tend to vote R more than D, but voted D almost as much as R up and down the ballot in 2020.)
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Please stop with your continuous re-iteration of lies.
The law does NOT disenfranchise voters, it EXPANDS voting access. It does NOT ban giving water to voters in line, it just requires the water be self-serve and unattended - i.e. you cannot ALSO deliver voter persuasion while delivering water.
QUIT LYING.
(Edited to tone down language because I had gotten a bit emotional. Message remains, vituperation removed. Also edited to remove message to admins as it has been answered and not relevant to post at large.)
The law does NOT disenfranchise voters, it EXPANDS voting access. It does NOT ban giving water to voters in line, it just requires the water be self-serve and unattended - i.e. you cannot ALSO deliver voter persuasion while delivering water.
QUIT LYING.
(Edited to tone down language because I had gotten a bit emotional. Message remains, vituperation removed. Also edited to remove message to admins as it has been answered and not relevant to post at large.)
(2)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
LTC Kevin B. - Sir,
I understand. I agree 100% the tags are relevant to the article. However,...
They way it was described to me is that whether the tags are relevant to the article is not important, it is whether the article is relevant to the tags. If someone were to come on to RallyPoint and be curious about the State of Georgia, or about voting, would this be an article they were looking for.
If you say it is good, then so be it.
I understand. I agree 100% the tags are relevant to the article. However,...
They way it was described to me is that whether the tags are relevant to the article is not important, it is whether the article is relevant to the tags. If someone were to come on to RallyPoint and be curious about the State of Georgia, or about voting, would this be an article they were looking for.
If you say it is good, then so be it.
(0)
(0)
LTC Kevin B.
SFC Casey O'Mally - Those tags are all fine, and the direction of relevancy isn't that material. In this case, someone curious about Georgia may not be looking for this content, but this content could certainly be relevant to their desire to learn about Georgia. A good example of a bad tag for this article would be if PO1 William "Chip" Nagel were to add the Mental Health tag because he thought the newscasters were crazy. That would be wrong.
(2)
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
SFC Casey O'Mally - Don't Worry LTC Kevin B. Isn't Hesitant about Busting My Chops when I'm Out of Line.
(2)
(0)
0
0
0
You see - this is the kind of shit that gets my blood boiling. Water points are not "banned" - a second party, walking up to someone to "deliver" the water is. It's called voter intimidation. Someone walks up with a bottle of water, and calmly talks about where my kids go to school, and it would be a shame if your shop gets targeted if XXX candidate wins. I agree with this, just like voter ID - if you can get Social Security, then there is no reason not to have a valid ID for voting, especially if a "vaccination pass" is being thrown around in order to travel.
This is the goddamn digital age, there is absolutely no reason NOT to have valid Identification - you need it for a bank account, you need to get utilities, you need it buy tabacco and alcohol, hell, you need a valid just to cross a street these days, so this bullshit about voter ID is goddamn farce, Democrats are fighting it because they will lose a third of their votes because the dead and illegals will not be able to vote anymore.
You cannot tell me counties continually have 10-20% more voters then whats registered, and this happens a lot in California. Google it.
This is the goddamn digital age, there is absolutely no reason NOT to have valid Identification - you need it for a bank account, you need to get utilities, you need it buy tabacco and alcohol, hell, you need a valid just to cross a street these days, so this bullshit about voter ID is goddamn farce, Democrats are fighting it because they will lose a third of their votes because the dead and illegals will not be able to vote anymore.
You cannot tell me counties continually have 10-20% more voters then whats registered, and this happens a lot in California. Google it.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google