Standing outside the clerks office with a first-time voter! She’s taking advantage of Michigan’s Proposal 3 which allows her to register and vote absentee all at once just 4 days before Election Day! #VOTE
Bloomfield Township, MI early vote turnout: Around 22,000 have voted absentee so far out of around 37,000 registered voters. cc: @ElectProject
Correction: 18,000 turned in so far out of 22,000 sent out. Still nearly 50% so far!
UPDATE: The whole process took about 2 hours (over half of which was standing in line), but she's now registered and has voted for the first time! If Biden, Peters, McCormack or Welch win Michigan by just 1 vote, I'm assuming it was hers :)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Just received the strangest voter intimidation/harassment call I've ever gotten.
Guy from Lakeland, Florida calls me up, starts asking about the election. I assume it's a standard phone banker. I explain I've already voted so he can move on to someone else. 1/
Instead, he starts asking *me* for info about Biden & Harris. He's supposedly "undecided" and wants to know why he should vote for Biden v. Trump.
I ask how he got my number (again, assuming it's part of a phone banking database), he says that my number was "on the internet". 2/
At this point I know for sure something's up. I probe him a bit further--he claims he "just googled it" and my number came up because I'm "the chair of the Democrat Party".
I'm the chair of a *local* Democratic *club* (and even then, my phone number isn't on our website). 3/
1. DON'T MISS THE DEADLINE!
In most states you have until 12/15 to #GetCovered, but 9 states + DC have longer deadlines to sign up (though your coverage may start later).
2. MAKE SURE YOU ENROLL IN AN ACTUAL ACA PLAN!
There's lots of scam sites out there, plus sites which are legal but still mix ACA plans with junk plans. Stick to either the official ACA exchange sites *or* to authorized partner sites which *only* sell fully ACA-compliant plans.
📣 UPDATE: @JohnJamesMI *again* tries explaining his position on healthcare policy and it...doesn't go well. Again (see updates at bottom): acasignups.net/20/10/29/updat…
James seems to have finally realized that "tort reform" has nothing to do with mandating coverage of pre-existing conditions, anyway. He's still touting "selling across state lines", "association plans" and "patient-centered, market-based" solutions, however.
A new bullet is to criticize the fact that several carriers have dropped out of the Michigan #ACA exchange. That's true, but he doesn't mention the REASONS they did so: acasignups.net/17/09/15/michi…
Dear @AOC: For someone who prides herself on being able to empathize with the poor & downtrodden, this statement is incredibly tone deaf and tunnel-visioned.
Yes, there are serious flaws w/the #ACA which need to be addressed...but it's a MASSIVE improvement over the pre-ACA era.
To be clear: You voted for #HR1425 this summer (essentially ACA 2.0), for which I applaud you.
But think about what you just said: You think it failed *in general* because it didn't work *for you and your immediate circle of co-workers*.
That doesn't mean it failed for others.
The ACA vastly improved life for tens of millions of people.
It failed to improve life for other people, apparently including yourself. Fair enough. But making a blanket "it failed" statement because you don't feel it helped YOU specifically? Think about that stance a moment.
Read her thread, and then read this post of mine from nearly a year ago about the Catch-22 "solution" which the state of Louisiana has come up with as a contingency plan in the event the #ACA is indeed struck down by the Trump/GOP lawsuit: 2/ acasignups.net/19/11/14/louis…
Louisiana has a Democratic Governor but is solidly GOP otherwise...including their Attorney General, @JeffLandry, who's also one of the *plaintiffs* in the #TexasFoldEm lawsuit to strike down the #ACA completely. 3/
Since @ggreenwald is getting some buzz today after resigning from The Intercept, here's the time that he tried to claim that my story about being harassed and attacked by Bernie Bros somehow meant that I was *defending* Bernie Bros: theintercept.com/2016/01/31/the…
Here's the post that Greenwald was referring to. @paulkrugman referenced it in a piece about the Bros, and I added an update noting that I didn't like the *label* "Bros" simply because it suggested that *all* his supporters were dudes. acasignups.net/20/10/29/updat…
My objection was purely a semantic one. It had nothing to do with defending the BEHAVIOR of certain die-hard Bernie supporters, which was reprehensible...just the specific label. I would've been fine with "Berniacs" or whatever. Since then, however, I stopped caring about that.