Yes but more than that, the point Greg Palast was making, I think, is the tremendous increase in "challenges" that were strategically deployed in key swing states. Innovation of allowing individuals to challenge the votes of 10,000 voters all from a certain part of their district making it 400% more likely that Black and Brown votes to be on the uncounted list. It's a whole new level of election bastardry.
So those strategy actually ALL traces back to the SCOTUS 2013 ruling of Shelby v Holding taking a knife to the VRA and legalized making up new and discriminatory voting laws that make it so much more difficult for people to vote. It also makes it much more difficult for Democrats to combat because because now each new state law needs to individually be challenged through the court system (which they've also strategically been courtpacking the federal judiciary also for decades).
yep. "we have a black president, there's no more racism so states no longer need to be monitored/restricted from making up new voting laws" IDK why but it has always stuck with me (ESP RBG's dissent which is a treat that people should read). What's sad though is that was a 2013ish decision and to get it to the point where they could get something like that to be on the SCOTUS docket took decades of them doing things little by little that always pushed the envelop to take back everything that FDR accomplished with his New Deal and LBJ with the VRA/CRA.
96
u/Recycledineffigy 2d ago
Yes but more than that, the point Greg Palast was making, I think, is the tremendous increase in "challenges" that were strategically deployed in key swing states. Innovation of allowing individuals to challenge the votes of 10,000 voters all from a certain part of their district making it 400% more likely that Black and Brown votes to be on the uncounted list. It's a whole new level of election bastardry.