Judd Legum

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

7. There is nothing that prevents the RSLC from using Facebook's funds for any purpose. Even if the RSLC represented that Facebook's donation would only support the RLGA, it would have no practical effect. https://t.co/AW6tBh1UFs — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

6. @Facebook tells Popular Information that the $50,000 donation to the RSLC was "standard practice" and represented "membership dues" to the Republican Lieutenant Governors Association. The RLGA is not an org, but a caucus of the @RSLC https://t.co/AW6tBh1UFs — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

5. The @RSLC has also set up an "Election Integrity Commission" pushing purges of voter rolls and new ID requirements It's chaired by AL Secretary of State @JohnHMerrill who attended a "Stop the Steal" rally and supported efforts to overturn the election https://t.co/AW6tBh1UFs — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

@Facebook @RSLC 4. Along w/supporting legislators pushing voter suppression laws, the @RSLC directly advocated for voter suppression laws The @RSLC supported an even harsher version of the bill that became law in Georgia, banning no-excuse absentee voting and drop boxes https://t.co/AW6tBh1UFs https://t.co/QVAOT73srT — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

@Facebook @RSLC 3. @Facebook routed the donation through a fundraising vehicle that the RSLC set up in Virginia, a state with lax campaign finance laws that allows unlimited direct corporate contributions. https://t.co/AW6tBhjvx0 https://t.co/QCCeDr2FeM — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

@Facebook @RSLC 2. The primary goal of the @RSLC is to elect Republicans to state legislatures and other state-level offices across the country. In 2021, Republican state legislators introduced 361 bills to restrict voting in 47 states. https://t.co/AW6tBh1UFs — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

1. BREAKING @Facebook pledged to suspend political donations for the first 90 days of 2021, then donated $50,000 to @RSLC, a Republican group pushing voter suppression laws https://t.co/AW6tBh1UFs — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

@JessicaHuseman HEB's CEO has recently donated 250K to Governor Abbott — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

8. There are a bunch of smart people making this argument, but not every problem can be solved with a Monte Carlo simulator. Making it more difficult to vote based on lies is wrong REGARDLESS OF THE EFFECT. But the effect could be significant. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

7. And then of course, the NYT analysis doesn't even try to contemplate the impact of giving the legislature the ability to control local election decisions. But you can't separate that from the rest of the bill. All of these provisions work together. And they reveal the INTENT. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

6. Voters should be treated with respect. They shouldn't be forced to jump through hoops because of a conspiracy theory. People are busy. And there are always people on the margins. If a future election is close, even a handful of votes can be decisive. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

5. Secondly, the NYT notes that most voters "brave the inconveniences" imposed by new voting restrictions. Maybe. But why should they? IMO, it's wrong to make it more difficult to vote based on lies and then dismiss it because most people will power through. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

4. We should not be making changes to the election code in order to justify a self-serving lie. Why should there be any chance that a future election is altered through reduced turnout based on an absolute falsehood? Dismissing it as low-probability is the wrong approach. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

3. So I don't think running these changes through an algorithm is the right approach. We need to look at the intent. And this bill is sponsored by the people who falsely claimed the election was stolen from Trump. The intent of the bill is to validate Trump's claims. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

2. First, we don't know the effect of this law in the future. Nate admits the shortened runoff period could impact "turnout in exactly the kind of close, low-turnout race where it could easily be decisive" Well, a close runoff election just determined control of the Senate! — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

1. I think this approach to the Georgia's new law is deeply flawed. It focuses on the hypothetical effect of the law while skipping over the motivation and the impact on individual voters. Follow along if interested. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

1. I respect Nate's work but I think this approach to the Georgia's new law is deeply flawed. It focuses on the hypothetical affect of the law while skipping over the motivation and the impact on individual voters. Follow along if interested. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

RT @JuddLegum: According to Republicans, if corporations contribute millions of dollars to elected officials pushing laws to restrict votin… — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

Greg Popovich gets to the heart of the matter: The voter suppression bills in Texas and elsewhere are about pleasing Trump, who continues to falsely claim he won the election — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

NEW Top elected official in Tarrant County, Republican Glen Whitley, comes out in opposition to Texas' voter suppression bill. Says the legislature should stop "screwing around." Whitley represents two million Texans. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

REMINDER: Many of the people sponsoring the measures restricting voting in GA, TX, AZ and elsewhere are THE SAME PEOPLE who insisted Biden stole the election and tried to overturn the election results — a course of action that culminated with a violent riot at the US Capitol — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

RT @JuddLegum: REMINDER: @ATT has donated $574,500 over the last three years to the Texas officials pushing voter suppression legislation a… — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

I don’t know who needs to hear this but just saying the words “cancel culture” and “woke” repeatedly is not an actual argument — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

RT @audiblevideo: @JuddLegum I can hear the GOP screaming "STAY IN YOUR LANE! Now about our political donations from you" — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

This is a breathtakingly incoherent letter. Coca-Cola making a statement about a bill that restricts voting is “cancel culture” Members of the Georgia legislature removing Coke products from their offices is a righteous protest against “cancel culture” — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

Why is @ATT desperately trying to a avoid taking a clear position while other companies make strong statements in support of voting rights? Look who is in charge of @ATT's "legislative strategy": Former RNC chairman @EdWGillespie https://t.co/S7CtjrE4xg — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

There is nothing in the constitution that says corporations have to be a regressive force in politics. Or that the only way they can be involved is by buying access to politicians. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

According to Republicans, if corporations contribute millions of dollars to elected officials pushing laws to restrict voting that’s totally fine But if a corporation makes a statement supporting voting rights that’s inappropriately political — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

@guypbenson And it’s not the activists that got corporations involved in “political stuff.” Corporations donated millions to the politicians behind these bills. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

@guypbenson It’s not canceled! They are just moving it to another location! — PolitiTweet.org