Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (224950)	2/4/2022 3:27:58 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 356410

Okay, you can’t grasp this issue. We are talking about a subject you’re unwilling to self educate on. “Some government officials were willing to do whatever CTCL recommended. ‘As far as I’m concerned I am taking all of my cues from CTCL and work with those you recommend,’ Celestine Jeffreys, the chief of staff to Green Bay mayor Eric Genrich, wrote in an email. And CTCL had plenty of recommendations. (Democrat group) CTCL said it had a “network of current and former election administrations and election experts available” to scale up “your vote by mail processes” and “ensure forms, envelopes, and other materials are understood and completed correctly by voters.”122 Each group was comprised of progressive activists who supported the Democratic Party, albeit from a posture of official nonpartisanship. Both Republicans and Democrats have such support groups and have for decades. Usually, that’s just politics. But not in 2020. CTCL’s network groups offered services that would have a direct effect on election results.123 Power the Polls, a liberal group recruiting poll workers, promised to help with ballot curing. The liberal Mikva Challenge worked to recruit high school–age poll workers. And the left-wing Brennan Center could help with “election integrity,” including “postelection audits” and “cybersecurity.”124 ========== Yes. It was all partisan. 100%. You know it. I know it. Why are you persisting in this nonsense. If you gave a damn you’d be up to speed on it.

To: Lane3 who wrote (224950)	2/4/2022 3:28:39 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 356410

You [node] are assuming ethical problems because it fits your narrative. The real ethical problem was that Congress didn't provide enough money to help the states run their elections and Republican legislatures spent less money in densely populated cities than was required given the existence of a pandemic. They knew that lower turnout in those places would increase the odds that they would win. Here is an article on how the money was spent. There is another one somewhere that I think I posted weeks ago that really gets into the nitty gritty by county and election district and shows that the complaints against Zuckerberg and CTCF are nonsense. If I thought for two seconds that posting it would actually make a difference in someone's belief system, I would spend some time looking for it. But, sadly, that would be a fool's errand. How private money helped save the election After Congress failed to aid local election offices, a nonprofit provided critical funds — including $350 million from Mark Zuckerberg — that paid for staff, ballot-scanning machines, protective gear, and rental space that helped the presidential election run surprisingly smoothly. December 7, 2020 \| by Geoff Hing, Sabby Robinson, Tom Scheck, and Gracie Stockton Bill Turner knew he had a tough job. He took over as acting director of Voter Services in Chester County, Pennsylvania, in September, just two months before a divisive presidential election amid a global pandemic. A huge voter turnout was expected, and Covid-19 required election managers like Turner to handle mail-in ballots on a scale they’d never seen and confront the threat of their staffers becoming sick. These challenges had forced many election offices to burn through their budgets months earlier. Turner had previously served as the county’s emergency manager, experience that seemed apt for overseeing an election that many observers feared would become a catastrophe. With a tight budget and little help from the federal government, Chester County applied for an election grant from the Center for Tech and Civic Life, a previously small Chicago-based nonprofit that quickly amassed hundreds of millions in donations to help local elections offices — most notably, $350 million from Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan. “Honestly, I don’t know what we would have done without it,” Turner said. The pandemic — and Congress’ neglect — necessitated an unprecedented bailout of election offices with private money funneled through a little-known nonprofit. And the money proved indispensable. Turner is one of 25 election directors from swing states interviewed by APM Reports who said the grant money was essential to preventing an election meltdown amid worries over a pandemic and a president who continues to openly question — without evidence — the legitimacy of the process. An excerpt from Chester County's grant application. The Center for Tech and Civic Life gave grants to more than 2,500 jurisdictions this year to help departments pay for election administration. The money arrived as historically underfunded election department budgets were sapped from unforeseen purchases during the primaries and were forced to spend money on election workers, postage and printing for the increasing number of voters who wanted to vote by mail. The nonprofit gave Chester County $2.5 million for the election, which is more than the county’s 2020 budget for voting services. Chester is one of several large suburban counties that ring Philadelphia — once-Republican strongholds that have shifted in Democrats’ favor in recent years. Pennsylvania was pivotal to Joe Biden’s victory over Donald Trump, and his win in the state was fueled in part by his success in Chester County. He won it by 17 percentage points — nearly double Hillary Clinton’s margin four years earlier. Turner used the grant to buy 14 drop boxes for ballots, pay staff to watch those sites and purchase body cameras that recorded employees collecting ballots from the drop boxes. He also spent a large portion of his grant funding on additional equipment and people to ensure ballots were mailed and counted quickly. The county processed 150,000 mail ballots for the November election in 36 hours. Without the new equipment and personnel, he said, it would have taken a week or longer. “This grant really was a lifesaver in allowing us to do more, efficiently and expeditiously,” he said. “It probably would have taken a very long time if we didn’t have the resources to do this.” The private money was needed in part because the federal government hadn’t provided enough funding. Congress allocated $400 million in March for election services, but that was just a tenth of what some officials said was needed. With little action from Congress, the private sector, led by Zuckerberg and Chan, stepped up. The couple awarded $400 million to nonprofits for election assistance — most of it going to the Center for Tech and Civic Life. The full extent of the grants isn’t known. The Center for Tech and Civic Life declined repeated interview requests from APM Reports to discuss the funding and how it was used. In late October, the group listed the jurisdictions that received funding on its website but didn’t disclose dollar amounts or funding priorities for each jurisdiction. But through a series of interviews, public records requests and a review of public meetings, APM Reports pieced together the details of grant awards in the five swing states that decided the election. APM Reports obtained more than 30 grant agreements and applications between local election offices and the Center for Tech and Civic Life. The documents show requests mainly focused on the logistics of the election: increased pay for poll workers, expanded early voting sites and extra equipment to more quickly process millions of mailed ballots. continues at apmreports.org