Libertarian ex-Congressman who recently left the GOP, Justin Amash, sounds off on how to fix Congress, gives his prediction for the midterms

[1srelluc]

It depends.... on all of them .....and each state's constitution is involved, along with the court decisions when sued on these issues.

Bottom line, if you think something was wrongly done, you challenge it, in state courts....

And the last decision a court makes on the challenge, before citizens vote, you go with as the legal decision, and voters are allowed to vote in the manner that the courts decide in their rulings of the challenges.... Whichever way the court decides and even if it is appealed for future decisions, anything that comes from the decisions of their appeals do not affect the present election vote....even if it differed with the lower court decision, BECAUSE the citizens were TOLD prior to the election, they could vote that way.

When it comes to something like not completely filling out their address on their ballot envelope or something of the sort, they should not be automatically rejected or thrown out, at least in some states.... If their constitution does not state they should be thrown out and the citizen disenfranchised of their vote, or their constitution gives all citizens under conditions like their age, being a resident etc the right to vote, can make a big difference in the court decisions to the challenges.... This happened in court decisions in 2020....

We as citizens have the constitutional RIGHT TO VOTE, legislatures DO NOT constitutionally have the right to throw out our vote.... No where does it say such in the constitution...

One court ruled that if the voter did not put in their address compketely, but there was record that the voter requested the absentee ballot, and the ballot envelope had a signature, and the signature matched their records, then the citizens right to vote, outweighed the rule about filling out their address completely.....

Another court ruled that absentee votes could not be rejected simply for an address not filled out or signatures not quite right without notifying the voter and giving them a few days to come in and correct what the election office etc, rejected...

NOTHING is more important than the citizen's right to vote ...and pick their representatives and leaders, in a Constitutional, Democratic Republic! Courts make their decisions from this view.

And if you are old enough to remember the Bush v Gore 2000 election recount....

where in election rules did the legislatures write in rules in their election law for counting .....?

Hanging Chads, and Dimples????

No where....

But those votes were allowed to be counted, BECAUSE..... drum roll.....

There is nothing more important than the citizen's constitutional right to vote.

OK so you won't answer answer those two simple questions without a essay about nothing to avoid answering....It was not even a nice try.....You blew it.

I won't bother with you from now on 'cause you are everything I've come to expect from your ilk.

 

[1srelluc]

I used to support a slow transition into voter ID. Not anymore. It's pointless.

Why should millions of Americans be forced to get yet another ID if when the next Trump type candidate loses they will just claim the IDs we're fake or forged or whatever. Probably claim china was seen dropping off boxes of fake IDs during the night.

For an elecorate who believes in Jewish space lasers and secret Italian servers changing votes, fake IDs would be an easy sell.

 

[Catsnmeters]

View attachment 715850

Ahh, dismiss my point with a cope meme.

Classic move.

That aside. Am I wrong? If voter IDs we're required for 2024 and Trump ran and lost and then Trump claimed voter IDs we're dropped off by china, forged or whatever would you believe him?

If you wouldn't I bet their are a lot of posters here that would.

 

[1srelluc]

Ahh, dismiss my point with a cope meme.

Classic move.

That aside. Am I wrong? If voter IDs we're required for 2024 and Trump ran and lost and then Trump claimed voter IDs we're dropped off by china, forged or whatever would you believe him?

If you wouldn't I bet their are a lot of posters here that would.

I don't deal in whataboutisms.....Two simple question went unanswered.

A yes or no would have sufficed.

I would not have even asked for a explanation as I could pretty much have taken a measure from that.

LOL.....I'm certainly able to take both your measures now.

 

[Catsnmeters]

I don't deal in whataboutisms.....Two simple question went unanswered.

I never said you did.

What two questions did you ask? All I saw was a meme.

A yes or no would have sufficed.

I would not have even asked for a explanation as I could pretty much have taken a measure from that.

LOL.....I'm certainly able to take both your measures now.

Are you replying to the right poster?

 

[YoursTruly]

Fair enough I guess. But giving one party- the Democrat Party- all of the power doesn't seem to be the answer for sure.

Having a Republican Congress to counterweigh the Democrat Party's control of the Presidency and the courts would seem to be what you would want.

Having the dems get full control isn't any worse than both parties having full control. In fact, with one party in full control, at least there's no retarded fighting about which one is to blame.
The end result of either party having the majority is the same as if the other party had the majority.
They're both owned by lobbyist. Lobbyist get what they want, when they want it.