1/Here's the GA situation in a nutshell. The law says that a registrar or clerk must reject a ballot if the signature does not match. The consent decree agreed between Raffensperger and Abrams materially changed this law so that it is no longer a registrar's or clerk's decision. 
2/The consent decree now requires a review. Only a majority of reviewers can reject a ballot. While this looks like a safeguard it makes the process far more cumbersome. Also, the people who reject ballots now need to be named which might create its own dynamics and incentives.
3/Judging by the huge changes in rejection rates between past elections and this one, it may be the case that clerks just didn't want to go through that process or get dragged into a difficult situation, so they just accepted ballots that they would otherwise not have accepted.
4/@LLinWood is challenging the validity of the consent decree. That seems to be the right strategy for GA. But he is doing so in his own capacity. That might create issues with standing. I assume they are looking at getting the Trump campaign to join Lin's lawsuit.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
