Breaking: GA State Election Board approves HAND COUNT at precinct level for accurate results

H1: Alleged Breakthrough in Georgia State Election Board

Have you heard the alleged news about the Georgia State Election Board passing a resolution for a hand count at the precinct level? According to a tweet by Liz Harrington, the board voted 3-2 in favor of resolution 181-1-12-.12 to ensure the totals match with the machines. This alleged decision has been hailed as a huge win by some and criticized by others.

While there is no concrete proof of this development, the tweet by Liz Harrington suggests that the resolution was passed despite opposition from what she refers to as the Fake News, the Left, and Raffensperger. If true, this alleged decision could have significant implications for the integrity of the election process in Georgia.

The idea of conducting hand counts at the precinct level is not new. In fact, many election integrity advocates have long called for such measures to ensure the accuracy and transparency of election results. By comparing the hand counts with the machine totals, election officials can identify any discrepancies and address them promptly.

One of the main arguments against hand counts is the time and resources required to carry them out. Critics argue that such measures are unnecessary and could delay the certification of election results. However, proponents emphasize the importance of ensuring that every vote is counted accurately, even if it takes a little longer.

If the Georgia State Election Board did indeed pass this resolution, it could set a precedent for other states to follow suit. The use of technology in the election process has made it easier to tally votes quickly, but it has also raised concerns about the vulnerability of electronic systems to hacking and manipulation. Hand counts provide a way to verify the accuracy of the results and build trust in the electoral process.

It is important to note that this alleged decision by the Georgia State Election Board has not been independently verified. The tweet by Liz Harrington serves as a source for this information, but it is always advisable to wait for official confirmation before drawing any conclusions. In the age of social media and instant communication, misinformation can spread quickly, so it is essential to verify the facts before accepting them as true.

Despite the lack of concrete evidence, the alleged passage of resolution 181-1-12-.12 by the Georgia State Election Board has sparked a debate about the best practices for ensuring the integrity of the election process. While some see hand counts as a necessary safeguard against fraud and error, others view them as unnecessary obstacles to the certification of results.

In conclusion, the alleged decision by the Georgia State Election Board to conduct hand counts at the precinct level is a significant development that could have far-reaching implications for the electoral process in the state. Whether this alleged decision will be upheld and implemented remains to be seen, but it has certainly sparked a lively debate about the best way to ensure the accuracy and transparency of election results.

GREAT NEWS!

GA State Election Board passes 3-2 resolution 181-1-12-.12

HAND COUNT at precinct level to ensure the totals match with the machines

This is a HUGE win and was opposed by the Fake News, the Left, and Raffensperger pic.twitter.com/12FxvV9Tf4

— Liz Harrington (@realLizUSA) September 20, 2024

What does the resolution passed by the GA State Election Board entail?

The resolution passed by the GA State Election Board with a 3-2 vote, numbered 181-1-12-.12, mandates a hand count at the precinct level to ensure that the totals match with the machines. This decision is a significant step towards ensuring the integrity and accuracy of election results. It aims to address concerns about potential discrepancies between machine tallies and actual votes cast by implementing a manual verification process.

Why is a hand count at the precinct level important?

A hand count at the precinct level is crucial because it provides an additional layer of verification to confirm the accuracy of election results. By physically counting the ballots cast in each precinct, election officials can compare the manual count with the machine-generated totals to identify any discrepancies. This process helps to detect and correct any errors or irregularities that may have occurred during the machine tabulation, ensuring that the final results are reliable and trustworthy.

Who supported the resolution, and who opposed it?

The resolution for a hand count at the precinct level was supported by a majority vote of 3-2 by the GA State Election Board. Supporters of the resolution emphasized the importance of ensuring the accuracy and integrity of election results through manual verification. On the other hand, the resolution faced opposition from various parties, including the Fake News, the Left, and Raffensperger. These opposing groups raised concerns about the practicality and effectiveness of implementing a hand count at the precinct level, citing potential logistical challenges and delays in the election process.

What are the implications of this resolution for future elections?

The passing of the resolution for a hand count at the precinct level has significant implications for future elections in Georgia and beyond. By prioritizing transparency and accuracy in the election process, this decision sets a precedent for ensuring the integrity of election results through manual verification. The implementation of a hand count at the precinct level can help to build trust and confidence in the electoral system, reassuring voters that their voices are accurately represented in the final tallies. Additionally, this resolution may inspire other states to adopt similar measures to enhance the security and reliability of their election procedures.

In conclusion, the passage of the resolution for a hand count at the precinct level by the GA State Election Board marks a crucial milestone in safeguarding the integrity of election results. This decision reflects a commitment to transparency and accuracy in the electoral process, ensuring that every vote is properly counted and verified. By implementing manual verification measures, election officials can mitigate the risk of errors and discrepancies in machine tabulations, enhancing public trust in the democratic process. As we look towards future elections, the lessons learned from this resolution can serve as a guiding principle for promoting fair and secure electoral practices nationwide.