Other Resources The Political Joe » Make your prediction Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 14
 
 
2020-12-10 6:41 AM
in reply to: Rogillio

User image

Extreme Veteran
5722
5000500100100
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Originally posted by Rogillio

Originally posted by jmhpsu93

Originally posted by Rogillio GA lawsuit: “Some of the highlights of the 1,585 page suit include 2,560 felons who voted, 66,247 underage voters, and 2,423 votes from people who were not registered. The lawsuit additionally lists 1,043 individuals registered at PO boxes, 4,926 individuals who voted in Georgia after registering in another state, 395 individuals who voted in two states, 15,700 votes from people who moved out of state before the election, 40,279 votes of people who moved without re-registering in their new county and 30,000 – 40,000 absentee ballots lacking proper signature matching and verification.” Pretty specific numbers. Can’t see how they could make such specific claims without data to back up the numbers. Of course, the narrative is “there is no evidence of voter fraud”. SMH

Pretty specific numbers without backing evidence, just like the other 55 cases (and counting) cases that have been lost on behalf of Trump.  

If I sue you for $236,846.26 because I say you cheated me, is that any more valid than me suing you for $250,000?





Why do you assume there is no backing evidence? Do you think they just made up these numbers? All it takes is an search and sort in the databases of who voted to filter out the number of people who voted illegally. If I download my checking account transactions and I filtered on the number of times I used my debit card at McDonald’s I’d have a very accurate account of the number of times I ate at McDonald’s. Not exactly rocket surgery. Mixaphorically speaking.

Looks like 18 states have signed on to the lawsuit. Not sure that matters but I would think it makes it harder for the SC to ignore the case.





at this point, this has nothing to do with overturning the election

it's about setting the table for the next few years and fundraising.

it's about manipulating public opinion, showing off political allegiances and of course raising hundreds of millions of dollars. SCOTUS will not allow itself to get sucked in.

Rog, time to start a Hunter thread :-)




2020-12-10 6:42 AM
in reply to: Rogillio

User image

Champion
10154
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
https://thefederalist.com/2020/12/09/6-things-to-know-about-texass-s...

A good read and civics lesson. Sounds like the facts of the case are incontrovertible and the question comes down to the constitution.
2020-12-10 6:52 AM
in reply to: Rogillio

User image

Expert
4562
200020005002525
Middle River, Maryland
Silver member
Subject: RE: Make your prediction

Originally posted by Rogillio
Originally posted by jmhpsu93

Originally posted by Rogillio GA lawsuit: “Some of the highlights of the 1,585 page suit include 2,560 felons who voted, 66,247 underage voters, and 2,423 votes from people who were not registered. The lawsuit additionally lists 1,043 individuals registered at PO boxes, 4,926 individuals who voted in Georgia after registering in another state, 395 individuals who voted in two states, 15,700 votes from people who moved out of state before the election, 40,279 votes of people who moved without re-registering in their new county and 30,000 – 40,000 absentee ballots lacking proper signature matching and verification.” Pretty specific numbers. Can’t see how they could make such specific claims without data to back up the numbers. Of course, the narrative is “there is no evidence of voter fraud”. SMH

Pretty specific numbers without backing evidence, just like the other 55 cases (and counting) cases that have been lost on behalf of Trump.  

If I sue you for $236,846.26 because I say you cheated me, is that any more valid than me suing you for $250,000?

Why do you assume there is no backing evidence? Do you think they just made up these numbers? All it takes is an search and sort in the databases of who voted to filter out the number of people who voted illegally. If I download my checking account transactions and I filtered on the number of times I used my debit card at McDonald’s I’d have a very accurate account of the number of times I ate at McDonald’s. Not exactly rocket surgery. Mixaphorically speaking. Looks like 18 states have signed on to the lawsuit. Not sure that matters but I would think it makes it harder for the SC to ignore the case.

Because they haven't for the other FIFTY-FIVE lawsuits.  It's hard to keep track now, but I believe that there were two specific lawsuits related to the numbers you described above, and both were dismissed. 

2020-12-10 7:04 AM
in reply to: Rogillio

User image

Expert
4562
200020005002525
Middle River, Maryland
Silver member
Subject: RE: Make your prediction

Originally posted by Rogillio
Originally posted by jmhpsu93

Originally posted by Rogillio GA lawsuit: “Some of the highlights of the 1,585 page suit include 2,560 felons who voted, 66,247 underage voters, and 2,423 votes from people who were not registered. The lawsuit additionally lists 1,043 individuals registered at PO boxes, 4,926 individuals who voted in Georgia after registering in another state, 395 individuals who voted in two states, 15,700 votes from people who moved out of state before the election, 40,279 votes of people who moved without re-registering in their new county and 30,000 – 40,000 absentee ballots lacking proper signature matching and verification.” Pretty specific numbers. Can’t see how they could make such specific claims without data to back up the numbers. Of course, the narrative is “there is no evidence of voter fraud”. SMH

Pretty specific numbers without backing evidence, just like the other 55 cases (and counting) cases that have been lost on behalf of Trump.  

If I sue you for $236,846.26 because I say you cheated me, is that any more valid than me suing you for $250,000?

Why do you assume there is no backing evidence? Do you think they just made up these numbers? All it takes is an search and sort in the databases of who voted to filter out the number of people who voted illegally. If I download my checking account transactions and I filtered on the number of times I used my debit card at McDonald’s I’d have a very accurate account of the number of times I ate at McDonald’s. Not exactly rocket surgery. Mixaphorically speaking. Looks like 18 states have signed on to the lawsuit. Not sure that matters but I would think it makes it harder for the SC to ignore the case.

And this made me laugh out loud.  Kudos.

2020-12-10 9:29 AM
in reply to: jmhpsu93

User image

, Arizona
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
I think Albert Einstein said it best... "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

I don't see anything new here, these are the same claims they've been making that the state courts have already flat out rejected. Supreme court already rejected the challenge to Pennsylvania, zero dissents.
2020-12-10 9:33 AM
in reply to: Synon

User image

Buttercup
14334
500050002000200010010010025
Subject: RE: Make your prediction

My dog . . . this thread

What a country



2020-12-10 10:00 AM
in reply to: Renee

User image

Expert
4562
200020005002525
Middle River, Maryland
Silver member
Subject: RE: Make your prediction

Originally posted by Renee

My dog . . . this thread

What a country

Are you kidding?  You should see Facebook!!! 

This is the most civilized discussion on this I've seen on the interwebs.

2020-12-10 10:07 AM
in reply to: jmhpsu93

User image

Buttercup
14334
500050002000200010010010025
Subject: RE: Make your prediction

I'm not on Facebook

2020-12-10 10:20 AM
in reply to: Synon

User image

Extreme Veteran
5722
5000500100100
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Originally posted by Synon

I think Albert Einstein said it best... "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

I don't see anything new here, these are the same claims they've been making that the state courts have already flat out rejected. Supreme court already rejected the challenge to Pennsylvania, zero dissents.


Said it above. It's not about winning this anymore.

9million in legal fees. 200million in donations.

There is a whole lot of winning in all these losses.

2020-12-10 11:09 AM
in reply to: marcag

User image

Buttercup
14334
500050002000200010010010025
Subject: RE: Make your prediction

I believe the post-election donations are up to ~ $500million. I believe 60% 75% is going into Donald's new PAC, among other things.*

Crying wolf is a great scam, you can see why they wouldn't want to give it up. It pays too well. If Donald announces a 2024 campaign, it won't be because he's actually going to run. It's because money laundering is too hot right now and he needs his cult to support his lifestyle. And boy do they ever!

What a country.

 

*Okay, I looked for the source on that. Politico said in early November:

The Trump campaign has a recount fund, but the money won’t go to it unless someone gives more than $8,333. Rather, 60 percent of a donation up to that amount for Trump’s “Official Election Defense Fund” is routed to a new PAC started this week by the president that can pay for a wide range of activities — but is likely legally barred from spending on recounts, lawyers say. The remaining 40 percent goes to the Republican National Committee, which is allowed — but not required to — spend on the recount.

That has since been changed to 75% going to Trump's PAC NYT Nov 30

Instead of slowing down after the election, Mr. Trump’s campaign has ratcheted up its volume of email solicitations for cash, telling supporters that money was needed for an “Election Defense Fund.”

In reality, the fine print shows that the first 75 percent of every contribution currently goes to a new political action committee that Mr. Trump set up in mid-November, Save America, which can be used to fund his political activities going forward, including staff and travel. The other 25 percent of each donation is directed to the Republican National Committee.

A donor has to give $5,000 to Mr. Trump’s new PAC before any funds go to his recount account.

 

2020-12-10 11:39 AM
in reply to: Renee

Veteran
292
100100252525
Wisconsin
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Originally posted by Renee

I believe the post-election donations are up to ~ $500million. I believe 60% 75% is going into Donald's new PAC, among other things.*

Crying wolf is a great scam, you can see why they wouldn't want to give it up. It pays too well. If Donald announces a 2024 campaign, it won't be because he's actually going to run. It's because money laundering is too hot right now and he needs his cult to support his lifestyle. And boy do they ever!

What a country.

 

*Okay, I looked for the source on that. Politico said in early November:

The Trump campaign has a recount fund, but the money won’t go to it unless someone gives more than $8,333. Rather, 60 percent of a donation up to that amount for Trump’s “Official Election Defense Fund” is routed to a new PAC started this week by the president that can pay for a wide range of activities — but is likely legally barred from spending on recounts, lawyers say. The remaining 40 percent goes to the Republican National Committee, which is allowed — but not required to — spend on the recount.

That has since been changed to 75% going to Trump's PAC NYT Nov 30

Instead of slowing down after the election, Mr. Trump’s campaign has ratcheted up its volume of email solicitations for cash, telling supporters that money was needed for an “Election Defense Fund.”

In reality, the fine print shows that the first 75 percent of every contribution currently goes to a new political action committee that Mr. Trump set up in mid-November, Save America, which can be used to fund his political activities going forward, including staff and travel. The other 25 percent of each donation is directed to the Republican National Committee.

A donor has to give $5,000 to Mr. Trump’s new PAC before any funds go to his recount account.

 




Fools and their money.


2020-12-10 11:41 AM
in reply to: 0

User image

Extreme Veteran
5722
5000500100100
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Originally posted by Renee

I believe the post-election donations are up to ~ $500million. I believe 60% 75% is going into Donald's new PAC, among other things.*

Crying wolf is a great scam, you can see why they wouldn't want to give it up. It pays too well. If Donald announces a 2024 campaign, it won't be because he's actually going to run. It's because money laundering is too hot right now and he needs his cult to support his lifestyle. And boy do they ever!

What a country.

 

*Okay, I looked for the source on that. Politico said in early November:

The Trump campaign has a recount fund, but the money won’t go to it unless someone gives more than $8,333. Rather, 60 percent of a donation up to that amount for Trump’s “Official Election Defense Fund” is routed to a new PAC started this week by the president that can pay for a wide range of activities — but is likely legally barred from spending on recounts, lawyers say. The remaining 40 percent goes to the Republican National Committee, which is allowed — but not required to — spend on the recount.

That has since been changed to 75% going to Trump's PAC NYT Nov 30

Instead of slowing down after the election, Mr. Trump’s campaign has ratcheted up its volume of email solicitations for cash, telling supporters that money was needed for an “Election Defense Fund.”

In reality, the fine print shows that the first 75 percent of every contribution currently goes to a new political action committee that Mr. Trump set up in mid-November, Save America, which can be used to fund his political activities going forward, including staff and travel. The other 25 percent of each donation is directed to the Republican National Committee.

A donor has to give $5,000 to Mr. Trump’s new PAC before any funds go to his recount account.

 




Most important, can he use this money to pay off pornstars ?
Can it be used to settle with people accusing you of sexual misconduct ?
How about paying your children huge consulting fees ?
Or legal battles around paying your children huge consulting fees ?

Anyways, what's important is people got a T-shirt.





Edited by marcag 2020-12-10 11:42 AM
2020-12-10 12:43 PM
in reply to: feh

User image

Champion
10154
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Originally posted by feh

Originally posted by Renee

I believe the post-election donations are up to ~ $500million. I believe 60% 75% is going into Donald's new PAC, among other things.*

Crying wolf is a great scam, you can see why they wouldn't want to give it up. It pays too well. If Donald announces a 2024 campaign, it won't be because he's actually going to run. It's because money laundering is too hot right now and he needs his cult to support his lifestyle. And boy do they ever!

What a country.

 

*Okay, I looked for the source on that. Politico said in early November:

The Trump campaign has a recount fund, but the money won’t go to it unless someone gives more than $8,333. Rather, 60 percent of a donation up to that amount for Trump’s “Official Election Defense Fund” is routed to a new PAC started this week by the president that can pay for a wide range of activities — but is likely legally barred from spending on recounts, lawyers say. The remaining 40 percent goes to the Republican National Committee, which is allowed — but not required to — spend on the recount.

That has since been changed to 75% going to Trump's PAC NYT Nov 30

Instead of slowing down after the election, Mr. Trump’s campaign has ratcheted up its volume of email solicitations for cash, telling supporters that money was needed for an “Election Defense Fund.”

In reality, the fine print shows that the first 75 percent of every contribution currently goes to a new political action committee that Mr. Trump set up in mid-November, Save America, which can be used to fund his political activities going forward, including staff and travel. The other 25 percent of each donation is directed to the Republican National Committee.

A donor has to give $5,000 to Mr. Trump’s new PAC before any funds go to his recount account.

 




Fools and their money.


Usually said by people without money. Ask yourself how a fool and he money got together in the first place.

Personally I don’t care how anyone spends their money. If they choose to give to the church or to politics or spend $500 at a nice restaurant or spend $3,000 for a bicycle I don’t care. Most people earn their money by working and it’s up to them how they spend their money. Incidentally, my wife and I just got back from a closing. We bought a lot on the Elk River and plan to build a second home there. Do we need a second home? Nope. But we worked for every penny we have and spend as we see fit.

2020-12-10 12:54 PM
in reply to: Synon

User image

Champion
10154
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Originally posted by Synon

I think Albert Einstein said it best... "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

I don't see anything new here, these are the same claims they've been making that the state courts have already flat out rejected. Supreme court already rejected the challenge to Pennsylvania, zero dissents.


When a reporter asked, "How did it feel to fail 1,000 times?" Edison replied, "I didn't fail 1,000 times. The light bulb was an invention with 1,000 steps." "Great success is built on failure, frustration, even catastrophy."


Maybe the Trump team is learning as they go? Notices the suit from Texas is not “the same thing” over and over. This time they are challenging on constitutional grounds. Maybe it will work and maybe it won’t. But I certainly don’t fault anyone for challenging the results of a competition. I would have bet good money that Lance Armstrong didn’t cheat...but he did and he got caught.

Lance is not a common name these days but in mid evil time people named their kids Lance a lot.


2020-12-10 2:11 PM
in reply to: Rogillio

User image

Buttercup
14334
500050002000200010010010025
Subject: RE: Make your prediction

Originally posted by Rogillio
Originally posted by feh Fools and their money.
Usually said by people without money. Ask yourself how a fool and he money got together in the first place. Personally I don’t care how anyone spends their money. If they choose to give to the church or to politics or spend $500 at a nice restaurant or spend $3,000 for a bicycle I don’t care. Most people earn their money by working and it’s up to them how they spend their money. Incidentally, my wife and I just got back from a closing. We bought a lot on the Elk River and plan to build a second home there. Do we need a second home? Nope. But we worked for every penny we have and spend as we see fit.

Congrats on your new property!

Of course, no one is saying fools should not be hustled out of their money. I find offensive the hustler convincing the fools to fund his lifestyle and pad his bank account while claiming it's about "saving America" from the 81 million votes that didn't go his way when, in fact, he's a brokeass bum who is too lazy to earn an honest living.

Now, people want and choose to enrich him. That's their business. But it's a shame to see desperate, confused and misguided people hyped up on anxiety, paranoia and feeling under attack because this hustler's hustle depends on them feeling that way. It's sick but it works. You can't fix stupid, as they say.

The people who were hustled by his Trump University hustle were out 10s of thousands of dollars; they were just trying to learn how to get ahead, build personal wealth. The people who were hustled by his Trump children's cancer charity were trying to help sick and dying kids. At least with this election scam hustle, people know it's just going to enrich him directly.

 

2020-12-10 3:04 PM
in reply to: Renee

User image

Champion
10154
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Originally posted by Renee

Originally posted by Rogillio
Originally posted by feh Fools and their money.
Usually said by people without money. Ask yourself how a fool and he money got together in the first place. Personally I don’t care how anyone spends their money. If they choose to give to the church or to politics or spend $500 at a nice restaurant or spend $3,000 for a bicycle I don’t care. Most people earn their money by working and it’s up to them how they spend their money. Incidentally, my wife and I just got back from a closing. We bought a lot on the Elk River and plan to build a second home there. Do we need a second home? Nope. But we worked for every penny we have and spend as we see fit.

Congrats on your new property!

Of course, no one is saying fools should not be hustled out of their money. I find offensive the hustler convincing the fools to fund his lifestyle and pad his bank account while claiming it's about "saving America" from the 81 million votes that didn't go his way when, in fact, he's a brokeass bum who is too lazy to earn an honest living.

Now, people want and choose to enrich him. That's their business. But it's a shame to see desperate, confused and misguided people hyped up on anxiety, paranoia and feeling under attack because this hustler's hustle depends on them feeling that way. It's sick but it works. You can't fix stupid, as they say.

The people who were hustled by his Trump University hustle were out 10s of thousands of dollars; they were just trying to learn how to get ahead, build personal wealth. The people who were hustled by his Trump children's cancer charity were trying to help sick and dying kids. At least with this election scam hustle, people know it's just going to enrich him directly.

 





Such is life my friend. What one person sees as a hustle another sees value. There is plenty of evidence of voting fraud if you look at facts and data and not the media spin. Was there enough fraud to flip the outcome? We will probably never know. But to dismiss all the thousands of affidavits of fraud as baseless is very close minded and I always thought you were open minded. I remain unconvinced there was enough fraud to flip the election but am more than willing to listen to the allegations and let the investigations proceed for the sake of the republic. You claim the fraud is ‘hype’. Maybe it is and maybe it is not. Why is the left so afraid of the challenge? Accuse me of murder and I welcome investigations...as long as I am innocent. The investigations would exonerate me...as long as I am innocent. IOW, me think the left doth protest too much. :-). The debate here has evolved into a plot to raise money for the GOP? SoTF what? Raise money for the GOP for future elections - pure marketing genius! Bet the Dems wish they had thought of it first. LOL


2020-12-11 6:44 AM
in reply to: Rogillio

User image

Champion
10154
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/12/a_summary_of_texas_...

Good summary of the Texas case. Looks like the facts could be easily proven or disproven. Pretty easy to read a postmark date and compare it to when the vote was cast. If the vote registered before the mailed date, someone has some ‘splaining to do Lucy.

Last I saw, 23 states have now signed on to the lawsuit. Read the allegations. Look at the facts and data and don’t rely on that media is telling you. But the case is mostly about election officials unilaterally violating the states’ legislatures. IOW, they didn’t follow their own rules. They may not win but it’s getting harder for them to not even hear the case. I can’t imagine making these allegations with very specific numbers if they didn’t have documents substantiating their claims. You don’t just make up a number like 42,782 and file that is a lawsuit without documentation proving the number.

My hope is there is enough thing right about the election to overcome what was wrong about the election. That is to say, there should be enough records and data to substantiate the vote or refute it.
2020-12-11 1:09 PM
in reply to: Rogillio

User image

, Arizona
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
After reading the article it seems clear the case will be immediately thrown out.

All of a sudden the post office failing to mark or marking incorrectly is grounds to throw out ballots? Or that delays in the system due to a order of magnitude increase in mail in ballots because we are in a PANDEMIC is grounds to throw out ballots? Sending the ballots far too late to be received on time because of the previous reason is a grounds to throw out ballots? These were not normal circumstances, this is just another slimy attempt to disenfranchise voters, not address "fraud".

Thank the lord the only states affected by all this were the 4 that Biden won by a slim margin. Who knows, maybe suing all the states your opponent won by a thin margin will be a regular thing now, wouldn't that be great.
2020-12-11 2:03 PM
in reply to: Synon

User image

Champion
10154
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Originally posted by Synon

After reading the article it seems clear the case will be immediately thrown out.

All of a sudden the post office failing to mark or marking incorrectly is grounds to throw out ballots? Or that delays in the system due to a order of magnitude increase in mail in ballots because we are in a PANDEMIC is grounds to throw out ballots? Sending the ballots far too late to be received on time because of the previous reason is a grounds to throw out ballots? These were not normal circumstances, this is just another slimy attempt to disenfranchise voters, not address "fraud".

Thank the lord the only states affected by all this were the 4 that Biden won by a slim margin. Who knows, maybe suing all the states your opponent won by a thin margin will be a regular thing now, wouldn't that be great.


Is state law requires a postmark but local dem officials overrule the state law and ignore the law is that not a problem? I guess you can do anything under the cover of “pandemic”. Right to assemble? Gone! Does the constitution allow officials to violate the law during times of health emergencies? That’s a slippery slope!

Tell me again how “delays in the system” allowed thousand of mail in voted to be counted BEFORE they were mailed out?
2020-12-11 2:57 PM
in reply to: Rogillio

User image

Buttercup
14334
500050002000200010010010025
Subject: RE: Make your prediction

Come on, Rogilio, you don't actually believe scamming children cancer charity contributions is legit, that it provides "value." Do you?

The "debate" didn't move to donations to the GOP, you constructed a rabbit hole to dodge what I actually wrote. Donald begs for money for "election recount" and a legal campaign to contest his massive shellacking and humiliating loss when, in reality, the preponderance of the donations going to his PAC to do with as he pleases.

Donald is a predator. The folks he preys upon happily hand over their money. That doesn't make him not a predator. He's a predator, a con artist, a hustler, a cheat and a fraud. He's making a great living at it thanks to his die-hard supporters who, one assumes, have nothing better to do with their cash than fund his hair and makeup bills. What a country!

2020-12-11 3:02 PM
in reply to: Rogillio

User image

Buttercup
14334
500050002000200010010010025
Subject: RE: Make your prediction

Originally posted by Rogillio https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/12/a_summary_of_texas_... Good summary of the Texas case. Looks like the facts could be easily proven or disproven. Pretty easy to read a postmark date and compare it to when the vote was cast. If the vote registered before the mailed date, someone has some ‘splaining to do Lucy. Last I saw, 23 states have now signed on to the lawsuit. Read the allegations. Look at the facts and data and don’t rely on that media is telling you. But the case is mostly about election officials unilaterally violating the states’ legislatures. IOW, they didn’t follow their own rules. They may not win but it’s getting harder for them to not even hear the case. I can’t imagine making these allegations with very specific numbers if they didn’t have documents substantiating their claims. You don’t just make up a number like 42,782 and file that is a lawsuit without documentation proving the number. My hope is there is enough thing right about the election to overcome what was wrong about the election. That is to say, there should be enough records and data to substantiate the vote or refute it.

These lawsuits are political theater to keep the paranoid masses sending donation$$$, as well as an outlet for Donald's impotent rage at his political humiliation. He said he was going to make his loss as ugly as possible. Promise kept.

81 million people voted for Joe Biden. The election is over. The orange man was never going to go quietly, he was never going to respect the will of the people, he was never going to respect the outcome. The "f your feelings" crowd are engaging in histrionics because they can't handle their feelings.



2020-12-11 3:59 PM
in reply to: Rogillio

User image

, Arizona
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Originally posted by Rogillio

Is state law requires a postmark but local dem officials overrule the state law and ignore the law is that not a problem? I guess you can do anything under the cover of “pandemic”. Right to assemble? Gone! Does the constitution allow officials to violate the law during times of health emergencies? That’s a slippery slope!

Tell me again how “delays in the system” allowed thousand of mail in voted to be counted BEFORE they were mailed out?


NO! Failure of USPS to provide a postmark should not invalidate someone's vote. How many times do the republicans need to be told? Stop trying to disenfranchise voters, it's lower than low. This was brought up before the election, but it's no surprise republicans did their best to sabotage the USPS knowing dems would opt to vote by mail, they have no shame.

The "votes counted before mailed" claim was some guy making the claim on tik tok. As official as some random person giving out numbers on a children's social media platform sounds, this has got to be a joke, this is their evidence? If so, I've got a bridge to sell you.
2020-12-11 5:33 PM
in reply to: Synon

User image

Champion
7542
5000200050025
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bronze member
Subject: RE: Make your prediction

Originally posted by Synon
Originally posted by Rogillio Is state law requires a postmark but local dem officials overrule the state law and ignore the law is that not a problem? I guess you can do anything under the cover of “pandemic”. Right to assemble? Gone! Does the constitution allow officials to violate the law during times of health emergencies? That’s a slippery slope! Tell me again how “delays in the system” allowed thousand of mail in voted to be counted BEFORE they were mailed out?
NO! Failure of USPS to provide a postmark should not invalidate someone's vote. How many times do the republicans need to be told? Stop trying to disenfranchise voters, it's lower than low. This was brought up before the election, but it's no surprise republicans did their best to sabotage the USPS knowing dems would opt to vote by mail, they have no shame. The "votes counted before mailed" claim was some guy making the claim on tik tok. As official as some random person giving out numbers on a children's social media platform sounds, this has got to be a joke, this is their evidence? If so, I've got a bridge to sell you.

Sorry...

If the law as currently written requires a postmark, then the failure of the post office to postmark a mail in vote invalidates that vote.  If this is a big enough problem, then legislatively change the law.  Before you get outraged, how many votes were invalidated due to a missing postmark (and is the issue with the USPS or the mail in ballot itself)?  Similarly, if the law requires mail in votes must be received by Election Day, don’t blame the USPS for ballots mailed the day before the election.  If the law requires a security sleeve or signature and it’s missing these required elements, it’s invalidated.   

2020-12-11 5:55 PM
in reply to: McFuzz

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Funny how liberals play with laws....but it's not new. Liberals will do anything to get what they want....they have told us that over and over....who doesn't believe them?
2020-12-11 6:42 PM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Extreme Veteran
5722
5000500100100
Subject: RE: Make your prediction
Originally posted by Left Brain
Liberals will do anything to get what they want....


So the supreme court, stacked with Republicans, tells Trump "sorry, you lost"

So the Chairman of the GOP of Texas sends out :

"Perhaps law abiding states should bond together and form a union of states that will abide by the constitution"





New Thread
Other Resources The Political Joe » Make your prediction Rss Feed  
 
 
of 14