Happy QAnon Inauguration Day 😂😂😂

[jfegaly]

I'm ignoring you until you can be a man and admit that you were wrong. If you can't then ignore me too.

wrong about what goofball? I am man enough that I have never ignored anyone. In order to be wrong, you have to, well, do what you did. Which was post fake news. So go ahead, get those quotes out and show me where I was wrong. Be specific now. You sound like someone very familiar. That did not end well for that welcher either

 

[jfegaly]

We interrupt the information differently. I do think the anti-Trump vote was strong too.

what info are you interrupting? I just cannot seem to place who you sound like, maybe someone else will be able to match the posting style.

 

[BCSpell]

Did you read the article? Another person who doesn't read what they've sent. 6000 votes that was fixed immediately. I don't care what people say on TV, you can lie on TV. In court, those pollsters admitted to having access. Also, In a couple of states, Trump lawyers said in court that they are not arguing voter fraud.

I did read it and yes, once the "glitch" was found, they claimed they fixed it. The POINT was not that it was found and fixed. The POINT is that it happened. That is FRAUD. You claimed NO FRAUD.


Would it have change the outcome, NO, unless the "glitch" that was found was widespread. What they Lib article didn't tell you, they were not allowed to search for more "glitches". And that "glitch" would not have been found if the Repub poll watchers, working in that location didn't notice something seemed odd, a heavily Repub district that supported Trump, but Biden got more votes, no one would have even investigated and the "glitch" would not have been found.

 

[BCSpell]

I know where you are going but multiple judges said the time to challenge that was before the election not after. No judge is going to throw out votes. Nobody wants their name tied towards changing a result. So they let it stand as is.

That is exactly the problem. I am not saying the election was stolen. I am staying it doesn't smell right, something seems wrong. You are right, Trump should be able to prove it, BUT as you just pointed out multiple judges and SCOTUS did not want to get involved. Did not want their name tied towards changing the results. SO, HOW can Trump prove anything if never given the opportunity. A case in Court has to move forward BEFORE you present your evidence.

I can't speak for everyone, but I just wanted to see a case move forward and evidence presented. Maybe it will happen with Dominion's $1.3 Billion lawsuit. Once all evidence is presented and a jury decides no wrong doing, I beleive most Repubs would maybe not like it, but would accept it.

 

[BCSpell]

You have to stop assuming things man, you don’t know if I’ve read it or not.

I’m not petty, if a democrat comes up with a law that benefits all Americans then I’ll listen. So far, they’ve produced nothing but dog shit including HR1. HR1 is another move the goal posts bill, you will not convince me otherwise, sorry.

Have you heard of the acronym K.I.S.S.?
Keep It Simple Stupid, HR1 does not do that.

Voter ID
Signature Verification
No mail in ballots
Have a damn good reason for absentee ballots
No voting machines
Paper ballots
No tabulating machines hooked up to the internet

Why is this so ****ing hard?

After the Bush/Gore mess in FL, they figured it out. They ran a great election and had their results that night. Every state out their should be following FL's lead.

 

[BillCutting4585]

That is exactly the problem. I am not saying the election was stolen. I am staying it doesn't smell right, something seems wrong. You are right, Trump should be able to prove it, BUT as you just pointed out multiple judges and SCOTUS did not want to get involved. Did not want their name tied towards changing the results. SO, HOW can Trump prove anything if never given the opportunity. A case in Court has to move forward BEFORE you present your evidence.

I can't speak for everyone, but I just wanted to see a case move forward and evidence presented. Maybe it will happen with Dominion's $1.3 Billion lawsuit. Once all evidence is presented and a jury decides no wrong doing, I beleive most Repubs would maybe not like it, but would accept it.

The dominion case will go one of a few ways:

1. Sydney and the group will be found guilty and will end their careers

2. Evidence will be presented and Dominion will have a lot to explain. Will it be enough to overcome the election? Absolutely not since SCOTUS isn’t hearing any cases. Will Dominion be done in the voting industry? History repeats itself so I doubt it.

3. Dominion will withdraw the lawsuit because they ultimately have something to hide which will stoke the fraud allegations even more.

4. #4 and #2 will go hand in hand. Sydney and the group will counter sue for damages

 

[jfegaly]

That is exactly the problem. I am not saying the election was stolen. I am staying it doesn't smell right, something seems wrong. You are right, Trump should be able to prove it, BUT as you just pointed out multiple judges and SCOTUS did not want to get involved. Did not want their name tied towards changing the results. SO, HOW can Trump prove anything if never given the opportunity. A case in Court has to move forward BEFORE you present your evidence.

I can't speak for everyone, but I just wanted to see a case move forward and evidence presented. Maybe it will happen with Dominion's $1.3 Billion lawsuit. Once all evidence is presented and a jury decides no wrong doing, I beleive most Repubs would maybe not like it, but would accept it.

Not only that, but the Kalim leaves out that judges didn't want to hear it before the election either.

Pre-election lawsuits related to the 2020 U.S. presidential election - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So, what we know now is that, basically courts don't want to be involved in elections. And whether or not you believe this election was stolen, there is no recourse if one is stolen.

 

[gatordad3]

After the Bush/Gore mess in FL, they figured it out. They ran a great election and had their results that night. Every state out their should be following FL's lead.

Now one area in Florida that needs to be figured out is Duval County. No way in hell Biden won in that county.

 

[kalimgoodman]

I did read it and yes, once the "glitch" was found, they claimed they fixed it. The POINT was not that it was found and fixed. The POINT is that it happened. That is FRAUD. You claimed NO FRAUD.


Would it have change the outcome, NO, unless the "glitch" that was found was widespread. What they Lib article didn't tell you, they were not allowed to search for more "glitches". And that "glitch" would not have been found if the Repub poll watchers, working in that location didn't notice something seemed odd, a heavily Repub district that supported Trump, but Biden got more votes, no one would have even investigated and the "glitch" would not have been found.

The glitch was found immediately. To me having issues isn't fraud. Why would you assume that because it happened in one county that it happened in all of them? Define that logic? I know that you can determine something to be an isolated incident immediately.

Now my real concern is like with the Gore voters, no matter how much you investigate or recount, some on the will always think that Trump got robbed especially since Trump will never admit that he lost.

 

[jfegaly]

The glitch was found immediately. To me having issues isn't fraud. Why would you assume that because it happened in one county that it happened in all of them? Define that logic? I know that you can determine something to be an isolated incident immediately.

Now my real concern is like with the Gore voters, no matter how much you investigate or recount, some on the will always think that Trump got robbed especially since Trump will never admit that he lost.

why would you ASSume it didn't? Why not have a forensic audit of all the machines in those states? Better yet, why not a forensic audit of the ballots? That would eliminate ALL questions. But for some reason, people fought like crazy to not allow that to happen. Wonder why?

 

[kalimgoodman]

There are two things I forgot to add.

1. This bill is not needed nor constitutional as it circumvents state legislation responsibility and makes it federal responsibility. That is not what is written in the Constitution. You’d need a constitutional amendment if you’re going to legally pull this off. As we both know, this won’t happen as most politicians wipe their ass with our Constitution

2. Ballot harvesting should be illegal in all 50 states. If you disagree with this then I’d love to know why you think harvesting is a great idea.

If you plan on sticking around, you will learn quickly with me that I am not a fan of the federal government or its overreach and power needs to be turned back over to the states. In my opinion, federal government needs to be reduced to about nothing

I also have no problem calling out Republicans. I just enjoy calling out Democrats more as I truly think they are pieces of shit. This is also coming from someone who used to vote Democrat.

Yeah we agree on the constitution aspect of things. I really don't know how they can get around that. Usually when states discriminate like they did with race and sex, they get involved but I'm sure how that applies. That's why if it passes, I fully expect it to end up with the Supreme Court.

The great ballot harvesting, now if they add tracking numbers to the ballots and you can confirm that your vote was counted and counted accurately, does ballot harvesting matter at all?

I call them all out. They all have stuff with them. I can list issues with both parties, thats why I focus on a particular candidates. I have voted for democrats and Republicans.

 

[kalimgoodman]

why would you ASSume it didn't? Why not have a forensic audit of all the machines in those states? Better yet, why not a forensic audit of the ballots? That would eliminate ALL questions. But for some reason, people fought like crazy to not allow that to happen. Wonder why?

My personal issue with this is I don't believe people like you truly care about election integrity or that the election was stolen. I believe it's all political. Now hear me out, here's why.

Something that I mentioned to you earlier but you completely ignored because I believe that you had no answer or it doesn't fit your narrative is that besides the known battleground states, there were other states that had issues as well. Other states had similar or the exact changes as a PA or Michigan. The difference is Trump won those states so nobody cares (Right wing media). NC didn't finish counting until the 11th or so. The Dakota's, Montana and Idaho had no excuse mail in voting (could be off on those Midwest states). Another state that Trump won, sent every person a voting application like Michigan did. Iowa changed some "laws" like PA did. FL has mail in voting, that Trump encouraged people to do.

So if you truly care then why don't you mention those "red" (dislike that term) states? Or is your point solely focused on the states that would overturn the election?

To me, it's like Clinton and Russia. When I saw how the Clinton campaign reached out to Russia for the Steele document and the Left ignored it, I knew the left mentioning Russia was all political. So I ignored it. Same here, it's just political or a hoax as Trump would say.

Until I see a Trump voter mention those states too, I will also see it as political.

 

[jfegaly]

My personal issue with this is I don't believe people like you truly care about election integrity or that the election was stolen. I believe it's all political. Now hear me out, here's why.

Something that I mentioned to you earlier but you completely ignored because I believe that you had no answer or it doesn't fit your narrative is that besides the known battleground states, there were other states that had issues as well. Other states had similar or the exact changes as a PA or Michigan. The difference is Trump won those states so nobody cares (Right wing media). NC didn't finish counting until the 11th or so. The Dakota's, Montana and Idaho had no excuse mail in voting (could be off on those Midwest states). Another state that Trump won, sent every person a voting application like Michigan did. Iowa changed some "laws" like PA did. FL has mail in voting, that Trump encouraged people to do.

So if you truly care then why don't you mention those "red" (dislike that term) states? Or is your point solely focused on the states that would overturn the election?

To me, it's like Clinton and Russia. When I saw how the Clinton campaign reached out to Russia for the Steele document and the Left ignored it, I knew the left mentioning Russia was all political. So I ignored it. Same here, it's just political or a hoax as Trump would say.

Until I see a Trump voter mention those states too, I will also see it as political.

SMDH. Sure count em all. lets do it. should have been an easy button in your post. That being said, many of the states you listed would be like listing California on the other side. But whatever, just audit the ballots. Sound good? Again, your liberal panties are showing. Time to make a post that displays you’re a moderate. Hop to it

 

[kalimgoodman]

SMDH. Sure count em all. lets do it. should have been an easy button in your post. That being said, many of the states you listed would be like listing California on the other side. But whatever, just audit the ballots. Sound good? Again, your liberal panties are showing. Time to make a post that displays you’re a moderate. Hop to it

How is saying look at every state liberal? Why doesn't the other states bother you? And yes California has some questions too. So why doesn't California bother you? Why don't you mention the states as blue as California or as red as WV? It's a fair question to me.

 

[jfegaly]

How is saying look at every state liberal? Why doesn't the other states bother you? And yes California has some questions too. So why doesn't California bother you? Why don't you mention the states as blue as California or as red as WV? It's a fair question to me.

as stated, but apparently you have issues with reading comprehension, i said sure, audit it...I am good with it. I also said, the states you mention wouldn’t make a difference in this election as they are all SOLID red or blue states. Most folks who have made your argument, follow it up with, there just wouldn’t be enough time to do all if them. If that’s where you’re going it’s pretty silly. There should be no fraud in any state, but we know which are tightly contested and which are not.

your question has now been answered. The expectation now is for you to jump on board the forensic ballot audit train. So hop on.

 

[kalimgoodman]

as stated, but apparently you have issues with reading comprehension, i said sure, audit it...I am good with it. I also said, the states you mention wouldn’t make a difference in this election as they are all SOLID red or blue states. Most folks who have made your argument, follow it up with, there just wouldn’t be enough time to do all if them. If that’s where you’re going it’s pretty silly. There should be no fraud in any state, but we know which are tightly contested and which are not.

your question has now been answered. The expectation now is for you to jump on board the forensic ballot audit train. So hop on.

I am not saying there isn't enough time. You said "states you mention wouldn’t make a difference in this election as they are all SOLID red or blue states". That comment is my point. It's about overturning the election. Focus on the swing states because 11k votes are easier to eliminate then say millions in California or New York.

If you want to throw out votes in PA that was counted "late", then throw out votes in NC for the same reasons. If you want to throw out votes in Michigan over mail in voting, then why not FL?

Apprantley, holding every state accountable is a liberal view 🙄.

 

[jfegaly]

I am not saying there isn't enough time. You said "states you mention wouldn’t make a difference in this election as they are all SOLID red or blue states". That comment is my point. It's about overturning the election. Focus on the swing states because 11k votes are easier to eliminate then say millions in California or New York.

If you want to throw out votes in PA that was counted "late", then throw out votes in NC for the same reasons. If you want to throw out votes in Michigan over mail in voting, then why not FL?

Apprantley, holding every state accountable is a liberal view 🙄.

Good grief you’re obtuse. sure count them all is what I said. You’re being ridiculous. Bottom line. I want the President that is elected to be the actual President that was elected. Sure, audit it all, I am good with it. That being said, auditing California won’t change anything. Auditing Idaho won’t change anything. Auditing Georgia might. Auditing Wisconsin might. Understand? It’s about using common sense.

 

[kalimgoodman]

Good grief you’re obtuse. sure count them all is what I said. You’re being ridiculous. Bottom line. I want the President that is elected to be the actual President that was elected. Sure, audit it all, I am good with it. That being said, auditing California won’t change anything. Auditing Idaho won’t change anything. Auditing Georgia might. Auditing Wisconsin might. Understand? It’s about using common sense.

I don't disagree with you about those hard blue/red states but I feel like you purposely ignore my point. I respect your thoughts but you try so hard to ignore my thoughts because you come across as someone who has to be hard right and use their talking points. Yet, I do feel like I've made progress with you haha.

My point isn't about the outcome, my point is about the anger. I believe if you're truly angry about process then that should apply to all states. That goes for everyone on here that talks about that, not just you.

 

[jfegaly]

I don't disagree with you about those hard blue/red states but I feel like you purposely ignore my point. I respect your thoughts but you try so hard to ignore my thoughts because you come across as someone who has to be hard right and use their talking points. Yet, I do feel like I've made progress with you haha.

My point isn't about the outcome, my point is about the anger. I believe if you're truly angry about process then that should apply to all states. That goes for everyone on here that talks about that, not just you.

no, nobody is ignoring Anything. Only one who has ever said anything about ignoring anyone is you actually. I can provide the quote if you like. Which makes this whole post incredibly ironic and nonsensical. In fact, from the jump, all of the folks you are lumping together in your post, would be perfectly fine auditing every damn state, and most have said as much at one time or another. So, while you carry on about some point you think you’re trying to make, it’s a non starter. Not because you don’t have a point, but because all the folks you think are disagreeing with that point, actually don’t disagree. Which is why it’s nonsense.

 

[kalimgoodman]

no, nobody is ignoring Anything. Only one who has ever said anything about ignoring anyone is you actually. I can provide the quote if you like. Which makes this whole post incredibly ironic and nonsensical. In fact, from the jump, all of the folks you are lumping together in your post, would be perfectly fine auditing every damn state, and most have said as much at one time or another. So, while you carry on about some point you think you’re trying to make, it’s a non starter. Not because you don’t have a point, but because all the folks you think are disagreeing with that point, actually don’t disagree. Which is why it’s nonsense.

Show me post of people pointing out irregularities in non swing states

 

[jfegaly]

Show me post of people pointing out irregularities in non swing states

smdh. Your reading comprehension sucks. Your moving of the goalposts and deflection is worse. We talking about supporting audits in every state or pointing out irregularities on a message board? Just curious if you know how to stay on topic.

 

[kalimgoodman]

smdh. Your reading comprehension sucks. Your moving of the goalposts and deflection is worse. We talking about supporting audits in every state or pointing out irregularities on a message board? Just curious if you know how to stay on topic.

That is not what I am saying. That's what you are saying. Don't make your words, my words.

My point is you don't see people listing, angry or talking about in specific ways about states that isn't a swing states despite them having the same/similar "irregularities" or "issues" because as you stated, it won't change the outcome .

So let's focus on/highlight states that Trump loss close and we can change the outcome (even though Iowa/NC was just as close as PA,WI,MI), so we say the election was stolen.

Just like the left wing Russia hoax. We have a right wing election fraud hoax IMO.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

So let's focus on/highlight states that Trump loss close and we can change the outcome (even though Iowa/NC was just as close as PA,WI,MI), so we say the election was stolen.

Or stated a more factual way: "Let's focus on the states where we have seen voting irregularities that cannot be explained, and/or the Constitutional process not being followed'.

Anyone that wants a free and fair election should want to focus on the same.

 

[kalimgoodman]

Or stated a more factual way: "Let's focus on the states where we have seen voting irregularities that cannot be explained, and/or the Constitutional process not being followed'.

Anyone that wants a free and fair election should want to focus on the same.

Exactly, not just the states that help my candidate...

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

Exactly, not just the states that help my candidate...

The posters you are arguing with in this thread aren't doing that. They are discussing the states where there have been issues. You are the one trying to twist the argument into being something it is not.

 

[BillCutting4585]

smdh. Your reading comprehension sucks. Your moving of the goalposts and deflection is worse. We talking about supporting audits in every state or pointing out irregularities on a message board? Just curious if you know how to stay on topic.

I say audit every damn state. You both bring up great points but if we’re moving to a blanket policy for all states mandated by the federal government (HR1).

There is no reason not to have vote totals on election night and then before the electoral college gets voted on, states would need their audits complete.

 

[kalimgoodman]

I say audit every damn state. You both bring up great points but if we’re moving to a blanket policy for all states mandated by the federal government (HR1).

There is no reason not to have vote totals on election night and then before the electoral college gets voted on, states would need their audits complete.

We don't disagree.

 

[kalimgoodman]

The posters you are arguing with in this thread aren't doing that. They are discussing the states where there have been issues. You are the one trying to twist the argument into being something it is not.

Actually, they are selectively discussing states that had "issues". I've seen people on here mention how PA was allowed to receive ballots late. Did they mention NC? Link below. So no they didn't mention states with "issues". They only mention states that Biden won. Show me evidence proving otherwise.

Supreme Court Allows Longer Deadlines for Absentee Ballots in Pennsylvania and North Carolina (Published 2020)

Republicans in both states opposed the extensions. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who joined the court on Tuesday, did not participate in either case, saying she had not had time to fully review the briefs.

www.nytimes.com

 

[greyghost14]

We don't disagree.

That‘s fascist .... disagreeing makes it much more enjoyable for the rest of us.
C’mon kalim, I know you’re better than that

 

[jfegaly]

Actually, they are selectively discussing states that had "issues". I've seen people on here mention how PA was allowed to receive ballots late. Did they mention NC? Link below. So no they didn't mention states with "issues". They only mention states that Biden won. Show me evidence proving otherwise.

Supreme Court Allows Longer Deadlines for Absentee Ballots in Pennsylvania and North Carolina (Published 2020)

Republicans in both states opposed the extensions. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who joined the court on Tuesday, did not participate in either case, saying she had not had time to fully review the briefs.

www.nytimes.com

I think you’re making a molehill into a mountain. Again, I think everyone here is cool with audits there as well. Again, you moved the target. Now, because you know everyone is cool with audits of all votes, you changed to....well how come no one is specifically mentioning NC by name. You’re reaching brah

 

[nothergator]

Now one area in Florida that needs to be figured out is Duval County. No way in hell Biden won in that county.

Most definitely agree. Have lived here most of my life and there's something wrong with the presidential election results.

 

[kalimgoodman]

I think you’re making a molehill into a mountain. Again, I think everyone here is cool with audits there as well. Again, you moved the target. Now, because you know everyone is cool with audits of all votes, you changed to....well how come no one is specifically mentioning NC by name. You’re reaching brah

Go see post #212. That was always my stance. People don't mention states like NC. I never moved the goal post.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

Actually, they are selectively discussing states that had "issues". I've seen people on here mention how PA was allowed to receive ballots late. Did they mention NC? Link below. So no they didn't mention states with "issues". They only mention states that Biden won. Show me evidence proving otherwise.

Supreme Court Allows Longer Deadlines for Absentee Ballots in Pennsylvania and North Carolina (Published 2020)

Republicans in both states opposed the extensions. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who joined the court on Tuesday, did not participate in either case, saying she had not had time to fully review the briefs.

www.nytimes.com

PA receiving ballots late wasn't the issue, them subverting the state legislature and the Constitution, was.

ANY state with ANY issue should be investigated.

I've never heard a single Trump voter say otherwise. I've also never seen a single Biden voter say this. Every Biden supporter claims there are no issues and let's move on.

Nope. Cheating is cheating. Fair and free elections are worth fighting for.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

I say audit every damn state.

Bingo. Audit every machine in EVERY state the week BEFORE the election, and then again the week AFTER.

Enact Voter ID. One person, one vote.

Anyone who wants free and fair elections, will support both of these.

 

[BillCutting4585]

Bingo. Audit every machine in EVERY state the week BEFORE the election, and then again the week AFTER.

Enact Voter ID. One person, one vote.

Anyone who wants free and fair elections, will support both of these.

I agree but no more voting machines just paper ballots that were filled out in person with signatures verified.

I’m ok with tabulators as long as they cannot be tampered with by being hooked up to the internet. I’d also take the actual adjudication process out of the person operating the tabulator. Let another set of eyes verify votes that the tabulator wasn’t able to verify as good with representatives from both parties being present.

 

[BCSpell]

I agree but no more voting machines just paper ballots that were filled out in person with signatures verified.

I’m ok with tabulators as long as they cannot be tampered with by being hooked up to the internet. I’d also take the actual adjudication process out of the person operating the tabulator. Let another set of eyes verify votes that the tabulator wasn’t able to verify as good with representatives from both parties being present.

No just being present, being actually able to see and verify.

 

[LizardGrad89]

Ok, let’s slow this down

What does the Constitution of the United States say about legislators of each state on election laws?

I assume you mean this:

Article 1 Section 4
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

But equally I see you do not understand it.

Nothing in 1-4 gives state legislatures any special powers. This is the merely and only the sharing of authority over federal elections with states. Nowhere in there does it say that state legislatures have any authority over elections different from their authority over laws in general. Now, the simple concept of our state governments is that they mirror the federal level: Legislature makes laws, Governor signs or vetoes laws, State Supreme Court interprets the laws. But it's not that simple. Governors also have the authority to put out Executive Orders, which is a way to alter laws.

So, think about election laws like any other law, because they are. Can Governors change aspects of laws through EO's? Yes. Can Supreme Courts reinterpret election laws or throw out parts they say are unconstitutional? Yes. Did those things happen before this election? They did. Did the governors and state supreme courts have the authority to do those things? They did.

One of the repeated lies on this board is the one that election laws are special, that legislatures write them and nobody else can say anything. Sunshine loves that lie, as does Curmudgeon. But that's what it is, a lie. Just look at Florida as an example. Florida Legislature had for decades refused to allow felons to ever get their voting rights back. Wouldn't even discuss it. So a Constitutional Amendment was passed in 2018 to allow felons to get their voting rights back after they served their time. Note that if only the Legislature was allowed to make election laws, this amendment would have never made the ballot, but evidently there can be provisions in the state constitution that override the Legislature. Then the Legislature passed a law that felons could only get their voting rights back if their paid their restitution first, which almost no felons are ever able to do, which basically invalidated the constitutional amendment. But then the Florida Supreme Court declared that law unconstitutional, and threw it out. Again, if only the legislature has authority over elections, then the state supreme court wouldn't have had that ability. But it seems they did. What does this mean? That the Article 1 Section 4 argument is flawed and invalid.

I've given up hope for Sunshine and Curmudgeon, but still hoping you have enough sense left to see a truth when it hits you in the face.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

I assume you mean this:

Article 1 Section 4
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

But equally I see you do not understand it.

LMAO!

You literally invent an entire argument for another poster, then detail in a wall of text how their argument (which they never made and which you invented on the fly for them) was wrong.

And for good measure, you then accuse two other posters of lying about claims they never made either.

That's special. Count every vote!

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

I agree but no more voting machines just paper ballots that were filled out in person with signatures verified.

I’m ok with tabulators as long as they cannot be tampered with by being hooked up to the internet. I’d also take the actual adjudication process out of the person operating the tabulator. Let another set of eyes verify votes that the tabulator wasn’t able to verify as good with representatives from both parties being present.

Tabulators should be audited as well. I know certain dems here are fine with using tabulators that count their guy 1.5 times for every one vote and 0.75 times for every one vote the competitor gets, but it irks honest and fair people.

 

[LizardGrad89]

There are two things I forgot to add.

1. This bill is not needed nor constitutional as it circumvents state legislation responsibility and makes it federal responsibility. That is not what is written in the Constitution. You’d need a constitutional amendment if you’re going to legally pull this off. As we both know, this won’t happen as most politicians wipe their ass with our Constitution

2. Ballot harvesting should be illegal in all 50 states. If you disagree with this then I’d love to know why you think harvesting is a great idea.

If you plan on sticking around, you will learn quickly with me that I am not a fan of the federal government or its overreach and power needs to be turned back over to the states. In my opinion, federal government needs to be reduced to about nothing

I also have no problem calling out Republicans. I just enjoy calling out Democrats more as I truly think they are pieces of shit. This is also coming from someone who used to vote Democrat.

Article 1 Section 4:
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

1. By the above excerpt from the US Constitution, it clearly is legal and constitutional for the US Congress to pass voting laws. (Funny that you make arguments from this section of the US Constitution but have no idea what it actually says.)

2. There is no such thing as "ballot harvesting". That's a Republican term designed to make something innocuous sound sinister. What it is, is ballot collection, and it's nothing more than a third party picking up a completed and sealed ballot and carrying it to the post office or the polling place. You ever heard of meals on wheels? That's a way we get food to people who aren't mobile enough to get it on their own. But you would make it illegal for people who can't get around enough to feed themselves to get help getting their vote in? You are a true Republican.

But yes, I know, that's an extreme (yet very real) example. While it is absolutely a way to help those who can't get around do to a lack of personal or vehicle mobility, it's also a way to get out the "lazy" vote, the vote of people who can't be bothered to get up and out and do what's needed. But I checked the constitution, and didn't see any penalties in there for being lazy, so evidently they have the same right to vote as the rest of us, and if it takes somebody stopping by their house to get their ballot and take it in for them, I don't see the problem. Oh, sure, I've heard the Republican complaints of "fraud", but what I've learned about Republicans and voting over the years is anything that helps them they say is needed, and anything that goes the other way they call fraud. Without any evidence of actual fraud, mind you.