Did NC and TX change their Voting Procedure?

[colfax_m]

There is ample proof that your side cheated.

I guess that’s why the lawsuits claiming such are universally rejected.

 

[colfax_m]

They don't care. They know it happened and play dumb. All the while mocking anyone who questions it.

I can almost guarantee you I’ve read more about the allegations of fraud than all of you.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

They don't care. They know it happened and play dumb. All the while mocking anyone who questions it.

I can almost guarantee you I’ve read more about the allegations of fraud than all of you.

Just because Obama Judges are protecting Biden doesn't mean they don't have merit.

 

[colfax_m]

Just because Obama Judges are protecting Biden doesn't mean they don't have merit.

Do you seriously believe that every judge has been an “Obama judge” in these cases?

 

[Rogue AI]

Just because Obama Judges are protecting Biden doesn't mean they don't have merit.

Do you seriously believe that every judge has been an “Obama judge” in these cases?

State judges are subject to elections themselves, they have no interest is ruling to reject any ballots. The entire process is tainted due the scope of the problem, regardless of party. Thus we see dismissals smothered in self preservation. Which left little moving forward into federal courts.

 

[colfax_m]

Just because Obama Judges are protecting Biden doesn't mean they don't have merit.

Do you seriously believe that every judge has been an “Obama judge” in these cases?

State judges are subject to elections themselves, they have no interest is ruling to reject any ballots. The entire process is tainted due the scope of the problem, regardless of party. Thus we see dismissals smothered in self preservation. Which left little moving forward into federal courts.

Wow, one rationalization after another.

Federal judges aren’t subject to elections and those lawsuits have faired Just as miserably.

 

[candycorn]

The sued states did not LEGALLY NOR CONSTITUTIONALLY change their system, IT requires an act of the Legislature in a State to change the process. By the Constitution.,

An act of the legislature you say:


View attachment 427202

The governor of Texas issuing a proclamation isn't a legislative action....

Governor Abbott Extends Early Voting Period For November 3rd Election

gov.texas.gov

So what do you say to all those Texicans who voted early? Sorry...your vote doesn't count?

Here is the part where you tell us that when Abbott issues an order it is perfectly fine but when officials in other states issue an order it is somehow bogus.

Hop to it.

I completely agree. What Abbott did was WRONG.

So, you agree with me that we need to move this matter to a 12th Amendment procedure immediately, correct?

Nope.

people voted using the rules that were in place at the time their ballot was cast. Your blob lost.

 

[Dana7360]

The sued states did not LEGALLY NOR CONSTITUTIONALLY change their system, IT requires an act of the Legislature in a State to change the process. By the Constitution.,

Whose Constitution? Each state has its own and the SC would probably not want to interfere.

The US Constitution applies to HOW presidential elections are decided READ it some time. It specifically gives the authority to STATE legislatures NOT Governors or committees.

Bullshit. The COTUS doesn't mention popular Presidential elections AT ALL. States were choosing EC Electors by non-popular vote methods as late as 1860.

AS directed BY the State Legislature. As the Constitution SPECIFICALLY says.

--- which has nothing to do with running elections. Once AGAIN the Constitution requires no elections.

Now then. Whatever the state legislature of, say, Pennsylvania decides, Texas has NO SAY IN IT.

In this case since the LEGISLATURE of the 4 states in question did NOT change their laws Texas does have a say as do the Courts.

The FUCK they do. Texas governs Texas ---- not North Cackalackee. PERIOD.

Sorry RETARD but those 4 states VIOLATED the law. You remember that right? The Constitution is clear as a bell. And if they violated the voting law they violated the rights of ALL the States.

So did Texas. The Texas legislature never voted to extend the voting period.
You can't have it both ways.

Aside from the fact Abbott's proclamation laid out all the necessary statutes to ensure it's legality, his actions could have changed the election results. Whereas the violations in question in the Texas lawsuit could. Totally different aspects of election law that simply do not compare. This is nothing but a red herring.

The fact remains that the legislative process was ignored by Texas when it illegally changed it's voting laws. Thus making the already laughable lawsuit it filed hypocritical as well as crazy.

I wonder, did the legislature of Texas vote to remove all but one ballot drop off box per county?

Or was that the governor of the state just declaring it?

Why yes, it was done by proclamation of the governor.

I guess it's ok for Texas to not go through their legislature to prevent people from voting but it's not ok for other states to do the same so that people can vote.

Texas governor limits election drop boxes to one per county in sprawling state

 

[candycorn]

The sued states did not LEGALLY NOR CONSTITUTIONALLY change their system, IT requires an act of the Legislature in a State to change the process. By the Constitution.,

Whose Constitution? Each state has its own and the SC would probably not want to interfere.

The US Constitution applies to HOW presidential elections are decided READ it some time. It specifically gives the authority to STATE legislatures NOT Governors or committees.

Bullshit. The COTUS doesn't mention popular Presidential elections AT ALL. States were choosing EC Electors by non-popular vote methods as late as 1860.

AS directed BY the State Legislature. As the Constitution SPECIFICALLY says.

--- which has nothing to do with running elections. Once AGAIN the Constitution requires no elections.

Now then. Whatever the state legislature of, say, Pennsylvania decides, Texas has NO SAY IN IT.

In this case since the LEGISLATURE of the 4 states in question did NOT change their laws Texas does have a say as do the Courts.

The FUCK they do. Texas governs Texas ---- not North Cackalackee. PERIOD.

Sorry RETARD but those 4 states VIOLATED the law. You remember that right? The Constitution is clear as a bell. And if they violated the voting law they violated the rights of ALL the States.

So did Texas. The Texas legislature never voted to extend the voting period.
You can't have it both ways.

Aside from the fact Abbott's proclamation laid out all the necessary statutes to ensure it's legality, his actions could have changed the election results. Whereas the violations in question in the Texas lawsuit could. Totally different aspects of election law that simply do not compare. This is nothing but a red herring.

The fact remains that the legislative process was ignored by Texas when it illegally changed it's voting laws. Thus making the already laughable lawsuit it filed hypocritical as well as crazy.

I wonder, did the legislature of Texas vote to remove all but one ballot drop off box per county?

Or was that the governor of the state just declaring it?

Why yes, it was done by proclamation of the governor.

I guess it's ok for Texas to not go through their legislature to prevent people from voting but it's not ok for other states to do the same so that people can vote.

Texas governor limits election drop boxes to one per county in sprawling state

Trump supporters like Claudette RetiredGySgt keep insisting the legislature did but show no evidence of any such vote. I lived there for decades (they likely haven't) and happen to know that the legislature only meets every other year. For them to convene a special session has to be declared. No such session was declared.

Its not even an esoteric detail like "where can a poll watcher go" that nobody really knows who doesn't do the job. This is a well known, iron clad, 100% fact of life in Texas and these two dopes keep arguing that the legislature took action.

 

[Dana7360]

It was unconstitutional. Thats why texas republicans sued him.

And now Abbott should be asking SCOTUS to throw out Texas's electors, no?

The TX SC already ruled in favor of Abbott

I see you don't know the meaning of the words legislative and judicial.

Please, look them up.

They don't mean the same thing.

 

[Care4all]

Was counting CHADS spelled out in Florida law by legislators in Florida, back in 2000?

How about accepting military ballots after the legislature's cut off, as was done in 2000?

One state and federal lawsuit after another, yet no stopping those things that the Florida legislature never legislated,

IN ORDER TO DISCERN THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

Every ruling was in favor of the citizen's vote counting in the tally...even those received after election day, and after legal cut off dates and times.

The whole purpose of voting, is to discern the will of the people and who they choose, to govern and lead them.

Trump's goal has been to disenfranchise American citizens of their constitutional rig h t to vote for their leaders.

What he is doing is unamerican, and undemocratic....He wants to be installed, against the will of the people, and their overwhelming choice.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

In Texas the case was adjudicated by the Courts. The Texas Supreme Court ruled the Governor was allowed to do what he did. In North Carolina a Federal Court ruled, wrongly in my opinion on the matter so it to was adjudicated.

 

[Claudette]

In Texas the case was adjudicated by the Courts. The Texas Supreme Court ruled the Governor was allowed to do what he did. In North Carolina a Federal Court ruled, wrongly in my opinion on the matter so it to was adjudicated.

Yup. The 5th Court of Appeals backed the Governor. Thanks for the NC info.

 

[candycorn]

In Texas the case was adjudicated by the Courts. The Texas Supreme Court ruled the Governor was allowed to do what he did. In North Carolina a Federal Court ruled, wrongly in my opinion on the matter so it to was adjudicated.

In Pennsylvania, their Supreme court said mail in ballots are a-ok.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules mail-in ballots can’t be rejected over mismatched signatures

It’s a blow for Republicans who challenged the state’s guidance that different-looking signatures shouldn’t be disqualifying.

www.vox.com

So PA's election was fine then, right? After all...you DID say the state supreme court can "allow" the election officials to do things. LOL.

Let me guess...somehow the two supreme courts don't have the same power in TrumpWorld.

 

[TNHarley]

It was unconstitutional. Thats why texas republicans sued him.

And now Abbott should be asking SCOTUS to throw out Texas's electors, no?

The TX SC already ruled in favor of Abbott

I see you don't know the meaning of the words legislative and judicial.

Please, look them up.

They don't mean the same thing.

No shit? Damn, my bad.
IDK how you drew that from my post.
As usual, you show how dumb you are.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

In Texas the case was adjudicated by the Courts. The Texas Supreme Court ruled the Governor was allowed to do what he did. In North Carolina a Federal Court ruled, wrongly in my opinion on the matter so it to was adjudicated.

In Pennsylvania, their Supreme court said mail in ballots are a-ok.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules mail-in ballots can’t be rejected over mismatched signatures

It’s a blow for Republicans who challenged the state’s guidance that different-looking signatures shouldn’t be disqualifying.

www.vox.com

So PA's election was fine then, right? After all...you DID say the state supreme court can "allow" the election officials to do things. LOL.

Let me guess...somehow the two supreme courts don't have the same power in TrumpWorld.

Actually the Penn case went to the US supreme Court and they ruled that it wasn't over that the ruling could be appealed.