It keeps being remarkable to see analyses of the Georgia law treat it as a set of good-faith provisions that can be assessed independently from how voting rules have been used in Georgia to intimidate & scare — not decades ago, but continually, recently:
https://twitter.com/taniel/status/1375934619229560832
These provisions below are some of the most important. Because has been the heart of this playbook — and continues to be:
https://twitter.com/esosa_osa/status/1378458663225077772
And to frame concerns about criminalization, intimidation, & suppression in Georgia as something “Democrats are concerned about” packs such disregard for history and historical reality.
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1378336504423051270
Finally: since story excludes analyzing some key parts of the law such as the transfer of authority (as it itself states), you’d think that it’s framing would be more modest — than to sell it, as that tweet does, as a story capable of alleviating concerns the law affects outcomes
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
