‘The Lincoln Project’ Goes Big To Flip The Senate Blue & Save America

0
628

On Thursday, the anti-Trump conservative group known as The Lincoln Project released a hard-hitting new ad targeting incumbent Republican Georgia Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, who are fighting for their re-election against Democratic challengers Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock. The half-minute ad spotlights Perdue and Loeffler’s support for right-wing fights against the electoral process in Georgia, where a slew of top Republicans recently sought the complete invalidation of the presidential election outcome from the U.S. Supreme Court. Although the court rejected this effort, Perdue and Loeffler publicly supported the lawsuit.

In the new Lincoln Project ad, a narrator says as follows:

‘They’re at it again — trying to take away our right to vote. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler support Donald Trump’s plan to strip Georgia voters of our right to vote. Black and military voters will lose their voice — you can stop it. Vote for Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff. We’ve come too far to go back to Jim Crow. We made history November 3rd — let’s do it again.’

Watch the video below:

Perdue and Loeffler have also backed legal efforts targeting voting accessibility in Georgia ahead of Election Day in the Senate elections. In a failed federal lawsuit that they supported, they sought to lower the threshold for setting aside mail-in ballots for the “curing” process in which authorities task voters with proving that they really cast the ballots with their names on them. Under current rules, two out of three participating election workers must agree that there’s an issue with the submitted signature before setting aside a ballot, but Perdue and Loeffler sought to lower the threshold to require the prior assent of just one election worker.

An unnecessary level of additional scrutiny for certain mail-in ballots could clearly have the net effect of unfairly pushing voters out of the process if they miss their chance to fix the perceived issue. It’s an unnecessary, disenfranchising hurdle. There is no legitimate evidence of widespread voter fraud at a level that would come anywhere remotely close to changing the outcome of the presidential election, and as such, there’s no legitimate gap in the ballot security process that would warrant the additional scrutiny.