The Texas lawsuit and the possible end of our republic.

[justoffal]

I have faith in our Conservative court to not only reject this ridiculous claim but to admonish EVERY Republican who endorses it.

Why should Republicans be "admonished" for protesting against stolen elections? There is really little point in spending the time or money to run for office if you are going to be swindled.

Further, no one will contribute to an election campaign that has no chance of succeeding because of fraud.

Because it wasn't stolen. For the first time in many election cycles, the Republican tactic of voter suppression was largely removed. Granted, it was because of the pandemic (which I'd like to point out was made worse by the lack of response from the WH and impeded by the Republican party). Individual states made their own election rules. It is up to the state to set those rules. If you truly believe in the Constitution, then you believe in state's rights. If not, it's just bullshit talk. You believe in selective interpretation. For the SC to rule in Texas favor, it would have to throw out and invalidate millions of legally cast votes. Straight up voter disenfranchisement. It's bad enough that the Republican party engages in voter suppression and gerrymandering, but this?...is straight up theft..and sedition.

How is making a person vote in person and prove they are eligible to vote voter surpression?

States made the election rules. There are states that have used mail in voting for years without incident. The military has used it for decades.
Voting in person (especially during a pandemic) may not be possible for everyone. Hence, a way for Republicans to practice voter suppression.
Everyone who cast a vote was eligible. 73 million of the morons voted for Trump.

Your man lost. And you're pissed. I get it. But this behavior is just un-American.

You just like mail in voting because it makes it easier to cheat, and you know your side has no issues with cheating.

Maybe you can explain how it is possible to cheat in a mail in ballot?

Do millions of soldiers and sailors cheat every year when they vote by mail?

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

How do you stuff ballots when each ballot has a unique bar code traceable to a registered voter?

If ballots were stuffed, multiple votes would show up for registered voters.......There were no instances of that happening

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

Harvesting is going around picking up unused ballots and sending them in.

So how about after the election we do a full count and comparison? I have a feeling many of these have already been destroyed to cover up.

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

That is not true at least in MI and PA. The outer envelope has the voter’s name and signature the ballot does not but both share the same number. The ballot is anonymous as it has no name on it for any counter to see. Different people verify and open the envelopes than those counting the ballots.

So count and match every single ballot and prove there was no fraud.

That's already been done. In GA's case..it's been done three times.
How many do overs you lookin for here?

its this simple. Trump got more votes than any other sitting president in history, yet the count had him behind.
Doesnt speak volumes but raises an eyebrow.
Enough to find out how that happened.
Not a big deal. But for some reason, the left is OK with it.

I get it.

You won.

But when the tallies were different 4 years ago, it was worthy of inveestigation...at the cost of 25 million.

Gee....I wonder how many winter coats for those freezing kids in Chicago 25 million would buy.

Hmmm.

THE gop got left in the dust...they will regret not having Trump's back....the deal they made with the left will blow up in their faces for sure.

JO

 

[martybegan]

I have faith in our Conservative court to not only reject this ridiculous claim but to admonish EVERY Republican who endorses it.

Why should Republicans be "admonished" for protesting against stolen elections? There is really little point in spending the time or money to run for office if you are going to be swindled.

Further, no one will contribute to an election campaign that has no chance of succeeding because of fraud.

Because it wasn't stolen. For the first time in many election cycles, the Republican tactic of voter suppression was largely removed. Granted, it was because of the pandemic (which I'd like to point out was made worse by the lack of response from the WH and impeded by the Republican party). Individual states made their own election rules. It is up to the state to set those rules. If you truly believe in the Constitution, then you believe in state's rights. If not, it's just bullshit talk. You believe in selective interpretation. For the SC to rule in Texas favor, it would have to throw out and invalidate millions of legally cast votes. Straight up voter disenfranchisement. It's bad enough that the Republican party engages in voter suppression and gerrymandering, but this?...is straight up theft..and sedition.

How is making a person vote in person and prove they are eligible to vote voter surpression?

States made the election rules. There are states that have used mail in voting for years without incident. The military has used it for decades.
Voting in person (especially during a pandemic) may not be possible for everyone. Hence, a way for Republicans to practice voter suppression.
Everyone who cast a vote was eligible. 73 million of the morons voted for Trump.

Your man lost. And you're pissed. I get it. But this behavior is just un-American.

You just like mail in voting because it makes it easier to cheat, and you know your side has no issues with cheating.

Maybe you can explain how it is possible to cheat in a mail in ballot?

Do millions of soldiers and sailors cheat every year when they vote by mail?

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

Which states sent ballots to every voter without a request?

What makes mail in ballots untraceable?

NJ for one sent out plenty.

How about we match every ballot to every shipped envelope, and do check to see if those people actually mailed the ballots?

NJ for one sent out plenty.

How about we match every ballot to every shipped envelope, and do check to see if those people actually mailed the ballots?

Yes, one.
Not one in question or contested in any Trump lawsuits.

So what are you arguing then?

I am arguing that I don't trust the election results and want full investigations.

Yeah....no matter who ends up in the white house the nation is irreversibly changed....people are not going to vote into a fixed system and I don't think it is possible to restore that faith....before the next major set of elections there will be a total departure from the selection process.

Nah, those on the left will continue to "trust" the system because they are used to people thinking for them.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I have faith in our Conservative court to not only reject this ridiculous claim but to admonish EVERY Republican who endorses it.

Why should Republicans be "admonished" for protesting against stolen elections? There is really little point in spending the time or money to run for office if you are going to be swindled.

Further, no one will contribute to an election campaign that has no chance of succeeding because of fraud.

Because it wasn't stolen. For the first time in many election cycles, the Republican tactic of voter suppression was largely removed. Granted, it was because of the pandemic (which I'd like to point out was made worse by the lack of response from the WH and impeded by the Republican party). Individual states made their own election rules. It is up to the state to set those rules. If you truly believe in the Constitution, then you believe in state's rights. If not, it's just bullshit talk. You believe in selective interpretation. For the SC to rule in Texas favor, it would have to throw out and invalidate millions of legally cast votes. Straight up voter disenfranchisement. It's bad enough that the Republican party engages in voter suppression and gerrymandering, but this?...is straight up theft..and sedition.

How is making a person vote in person and prove they are eligible to vote voter surpression?

States made the election rules. There are states that have used mail in voting for years without incident. The military has used it for decades.
Voting in person (especially during a pandemic) may not be possible for everyone. Hence, a way for Republicans to practice voter suppression.
Everyone who cast a vote was eligible. 73 million of the morons voted for Trump.

Your man lost. And you're pissed. I get it. But this behavior is just un-American.

You just like mail in voting because it makes it easier to cheat, and you know your side has no issues with cheating.

Maybe you can explain how it is possible to cheat in a mail in ballot?

Do millions of soldiers and sailors cheat every year when they vote by mail?

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

How do you stuff ballots when each ballot has a unique bar code traceable to a registered voter?

If ballots were stuffed, multiple votes would show up for registered voters.......There were no instances of that happening

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

Harvesting is going around picking up unused ballots and sending them in.

So how about after the election we do a full count and comparison? I have a feeling many of these have already been destroyed to cover up.

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

That is not true at least in MI and PA. The outer envelope has the voter’s name and signature the ballot does not but both share the same number. The ballot is anonymous as it has no name on it for any counter to see. Different people verify and open the envelopes than those counting the ballots.

So count and match every single ballot and prove there was no fraud.

So count and match every single ballot and prove there was no fraud.

Uff...
That’s what they do when processing the ballots.
Why do you imagine some ad hoc, haphazard process to count millions of ballots? Each step is verified and recorded, sorted and stored in order. How else could they possibly recount? It would be impossible for anyone to insert any large numbers of fraudulent ballots without the system recognizing the anomalies.

 

[bripat9643]

I must have hit a nerve. All the usual suspects came stampeding out of the barn like it was on fire.

Yeah, you’ll forgive us if after these allegations have been slapped down in literally dozens of lawsuits that we are getting a little sick of this shit.

What the Texas lawsuit states happened
Did happen, that is not in dispute
Will the court, follow the law.

Never know with courts and juries.

They state a lot of things “might” have happened and that “might” somehow is sufficient reason to rewrite election law or trash the constitutional rights of people who voted in our Republic.

Nope

You should have read the lawsuit. Don't blame me for your ignorance.

My guess is you didnt.
I know exactly what the suit is about.
Do you?
18 States feel their citizens votes were offset by the votes of 4 states where the legislative body of those states did not change the law. Instead the governors and the courts of that state allowed for the change of the law.
That is unconstitutional and truth is, will set a really bad precedent for our future.
A governor is responsible to enforce state law. A court is responsible to ensure the law is constitutional. Neither body has the right to change the law. Only lawmakers have that right.

Curious....there is a 6-3 right leaning SCOTUS.....more likely 5-4 seeing as Roberts is more in the middle leaning left.

Would you be OK with that court changing laws?

I wouldn't be...even though I am a conservative.

Honestly, the suit is about a great many things. Paxton didn't really engage in any editing, preferring instead to throw the spaghetti at the wall.

In a lot of instances of this supposed unconstitutional change, they're flatly wrong. In a lot of instances, the law was silent about certain procedures or policies and that therefore goes to the state's executive to implement laws with their discretion in such ambiguity. In other instances, the state's laws were determined to be unconstitutional and the courts ruled that the election law had to be changed as a result. In other instances, the governor used delegated authorities by emergency powers to alter state regulations in the setting of a pandemic.

Other states did this too, such as Texas, however they're not asking to have the courts take away their electoral votes because they voted for Trump. No, only four states who voted for Biden are being targeted.

This isn't about constitutionality and principle, it's about virtue signaling to Trump supporters. If it were about principle, there would be a lot more states named in the lawsuit.

If you are against the court's changing laws, then you should know that this VERY lawsuit is asking the SCOTUS to change the laws. So much for consistency.

well said, but I believe you may be wrong. It seems to me that this suit is not asking SCOTUS to change laws. It is asking them to interpret law. One can apply an executive order. But not if it is in direct conflict of written law. Does it apply here? I dont know. Neither do you. Based on your post, you are obviously intelligent. I believe I am as well...(although my wife calls me a dumbass but I regress).. But do either of us know constitutional law as the justices do? I doubt it. Let them decide. It may not be a valid suit. I really dont know. But with my limited knowledge of constitutional law, I believe it is worthy of consideration. My biggest concern is what kind of precedent will be set if the SCOTUS allows governors to "change" law. That can be very scary for all of us.

If you read the lawsuit, it's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact that the lawsuit is asking SCOTUS to delay the meeting of the electors which is currently set for Monday and which was determined by Congress as stipulated in the Constitution.

There's a process for challenging executive orders, and in some cases, that process occurred. Waiting until after the votes have cast to cry foul is not okay with me.

The SC overrides Congress almost daily.

 

[martybegan]

I have faith in our Conservative court to not only reject this ridiculous claim but to admonish EVERY Republican who endorses it.

Why should Republicans be "admonished" for protesting against stolen elections? There is really little point in spending the time or money to run for office if you are going to be swindled.

Further, no one will contribute to an election campaign that has no chance of succeeding because of fraud.

Because it wasn't stolen. For the first time in many election cycles, the Republican tactic of voter suppression was largely removed. Granted, it was because of the pandemic (which I'd like to point out was made worse by the lack of response from the WH and impeded by the Republican party). Individual states made their own election rules. It is up to the state to set those rules. If you truly believe in the Constitution, then you believe in state's rights. If not, it's just bullshit talk. You believe in selective interpretation. For the SC to rule in Texas favor, it would have to throw out and invalidate millions of legally cast votes. Straight up voter disenfranchisement. It's bad enough that the Republican party engages in voter suppression and gerrymandering, but this?...is straight up theft..and sedition.

How is making a person vote in person and prove they are eligible to vote voter surpression?

States made the election rules. There are states that have used mail in voting for years without incident. The military has used it for decades.
Voting in person (especially during a pandemic) may not be possible for everyone. Hence, a way for Republicans to practice voter suppression.
Everyone who cast a vote was eligible. 73 million of the morons voted for Trump.

Your man lost. And you're pissed. I get it. But this behavior is just un-American.

You just like mail in voting because it makes it easier to cheat, and you know your side has no issues with cheating.

Maybe you can explain how it is possible to cheat in a mail in ballot?

Do millions of soldiers and sailors cheat every year when they vote by mail?

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

How do you stuff ballots when each ballot has a unique bar code traceable to a registered voter?

If ballots were stuffed, multiple votes would show up for registered voters.......There were no instances of that happening

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

Harvesting is going around picking up unused ballots and sending them in.

So how about after the election we do a full count and comparison? I have a feeling many of these have already been destroyed to cover up.

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

That is not true at least in MI and PA. The outer envelope has the voter’s name and signature the ballot does not but both share the same number. The ballot is anonymous as it has no name on it for any counter to see. Different people verify and open the envelopes than those counting the ballots.

So count and match every single ballot and prove there was no fraud.

So count and match every single ballot and prove there was no fraud.

Uff...
That’s what they do when processing the ballots.
Why do you imagine some ad hoc, haphazard process to count millions of ballots? Each step is verified and recorded, sorted and stored in order. How else could they possibly recount? It would be impossible for anyone to insert any large numbers of fraudulent ballots without the system recognizing the anomalies.

Yes, because voter fraud has never ever occurred, ever.

Keep sticking your head in the sand because you got what you wanted. Lie to yourself that nothing funny happened.

 

[bripat9643]

I must have hit a nerve. All the usual suspects came stampeding out of the barn like it was on fire.

Yeah, you’ll forgive us if after these allegations have been slapped down in literally dozens of lawsuits that we are getting a little sick of this shit.

What the Texas lawsuit states happened
Did happen, that is not in dispute
Will the court, follow the law.

Never know with courts and juries.

They state a lot of things “might” have happened and that “might” somehow is sufficient reason to rewrite election law or trash the constitutional rights of people who voted in our Republic.

Nope

You should have read the lawsuit. Don't blame me for your ignorance.

My guess is you didnt.
I know exactly what the suit is about.
Do you?
18 States feel their citizens votes were offset by the votes of 4 states where the legislative body of those states did not change the law. Instead the governors and the courts of that state allowed for the change of the law.
That is unconstitutional and truth is, will set a really bad precedent for our future.
A governor is responsible to enforce state law. A court is responsible to ensure the law is constitutional. Neither body has the right to change the law. Only lawmakers have that right.

Curious....there is a 6-3 right leaning SCOTUS.....more likely 5-4 seeing as Roberts is more in the middle leaning left.

Would you be OK with that court changing laws?

I wouldn't be...even though I am a conservative.

Honestly, the suit is about a great many things. Paxton didn't really engage in any editing, preferring instead to throw the spaghetti at the wall.

In a lot of instances of this supposed unconstitutional change, they're flatly wrong. In a lot of instances, the law was silent about certain procedures or policies and that therefore goes to the state's executive to implement laws with their discretion in such ambiguity. In other instances, the state's laws were determined to be unconstitutional and the courts ruled that the election law had to be changed as a result. In other instances, the governor used delegated authorities by emergency powers to alter state regulations in the setting of a pandemic.

Other states did this too, such as Texas, however they're not asking to have the courts take away their electoral votes because they voted for Trump. No, only four states who voted for Biden are being targeted.

This isn't about constitutionality and principle, it's about virtue signaling to Trump supporters. If it were about principle, there would be a lot more states named in the lawsuit.

If you are against the court's changing laws, then you should know that this VERY lawsuit is asking the SCOTUS to change the laws. So much for consistency.

well said, but I believe you may be wrong. It seems to me that this suit is not asking SCOTUS to change laws. It is asking them to interpret law. One can apply an executive order. But not if it is in direct conflict of written law. Does it apply here? I dont know. Neither do you. Based on your post, you are obviously intelligent. I believe I am as well...(although my wife calls me a dumbass but I regress).. But do either of us know constitutional law as the justices do? I doubt it. Let them decide. It may not be a valid suit. I really dont know. But with my limited knowledge of constitutional law, I believe it is worthy of consideration. My biggest concern is what kind of precedent will be set if the SCOTUS allows governors to "change" law. That can be very scary for all of us.

If you read the lawsuit, it's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact that the lawsuit is asking SCOTUS to delay the meeting of the electors which is currently set for Monday and which was determined by Congress as stipulated in the Constitution.

There's a process for challenging executive orders, and in some cases, that process occurred. Waiting until after the votes have cast to cry foul is not okay with me.

I respect you sentiments. I happen to disagree, but I understand your position.

Why would anyone respect Colfax? He's a lying moron.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not going to bothering reading the thread ... looks like the same vomit from yesterday ...

Anyone dared comment on the merits of the case yet? ... the OP is crazy wrong ... if we let Texas dictate how Michigan interprets their own laws ... pfffft ... worst, allow Texas to go straight to SCOTUS ... well ... then ... er ...

What's to stop California from telling Mississippi how to run their education system? ... and going straight to SCOTUS with the complaint ...

No ... I didn';t think anyone wanted to discuss this matter honestly ... sorry for interrupting ...

This is what annoys me the worst. I know this is a Hail Mary and it has no chance of overturning the election, but the fact that Texas even had a path to take this directly to the SC with 1) no successful lower court rulings, and 2) Able to file a lawsuit that essentially is looking to interfere in another states' affairs....is a complete travesty.

So you have no idea about how multiple state issues are resolved. It goes directly to the supreme court. Always. Always. Always.
You are not worthy of adding to this conversation as you are naive as to how a republic works.

FYI....we are a republic.

I laugh at those that attempt to debate and say things that are not factually correct. Its like "Rachel Maddow said this so I can regirgitate it
There IS no issue, snowflake. That's the point. This is frivolous. Texas has NO standing to question another state's process. They suffered no harm.
So do me a favor and stow your upturned nose. I don't give a shit.

Oh. I see. A state voted legally, and their electoral college votes are offset by a state that votes against the constitution. Got it.
Good for you.

So what you're really trying to say here is that state's DON'T have the right to make their own laws. Again, selective interpretation. So much for that yellowed scrap of paper.
Texas wasn't harmed therefore has no standing to bring the suit...unless you are postulating that because Texas voted for Trump, these other states have to as well.

Uh...excuse me. I never said that. States get to make their own laws. Always. Governors and judges do not have the right to change those laws according to the constitution. Only LAW MAKERS do.
Know your stuff before you debate.

No chance

This really isn't going to happen.

You guys really need to calm down. Go out and get some air. Spend the day in a forest with no cell phone.

Yep, just let the cheating happen, after all Progs know what's best for us because we don't.

Yep, just let the cheating happen, after all Progs know what's best for us because we don't.

Cheating?
All 50 governors have certified their election results.

Yes. All states certified the results. I expected that. The question is, should states have their electoral college numbers offset by states that had non law makers change their election laws? And 18 governors and AG's are protecting their state citizens from having their vote offset.
Analogy.....

During a football game, there were 3 calls turned over by instant replay review. The last play of the game, where a player scored the winning touchdown, there was question whether or not his foot stepped on the sideline. It was an SEC team vs. an ACC game. You are an ACC fan. It was an SEC player that scored the apparent touchdown. The head ref decides to amend the rules and claims "we will not review the last play of a game"......would you not question what the hell and be upset about the mid game change of rules??

Now...that is a lousy football game. What about the election of a President of the United States?

They literally do not care

They are psychopaths -

I bet they would care if the tables were turned.

The Hillary supporters got the fuck over it, like adults

Anyone who "get's over" a swindled election is a scumbag.

What do we call those who whine about losing and then pretend that it was a swindled election with no evidence.....(see all those court losses). A sucker? Seditious? A cultist?

Those all work!

No one is pretending, douchebag.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I have faith in our Conservative court to not only reject this ridiculous claim but to admonish EVERY Republican who endorses it.

Why should Republicans be "admonished" for protesting against stolen elections? There is really little point in spending the time or money to run for office if you are going to be swindled.

Further, no one will contribute to an election campaign that has no chance of succeeding because of fraud.

Because it wasn't stolen. For the first time in many election cycles, the Republican tactic of voter suppression was largely removed. Granted, it was because of the pandemic (which I'd like to point out was made worse by the lack of response from the WH and impeded by the Republican party). Individual states made their own election rules. It is up to the state to set those rules. If you truly believe in the Constitution, then you believe in state's rights. If not, it's just bullshit talk. You believe in selective interpretation. For the SC to rule in Texas favor, it would have to throw out and invalidate millions of legally cast votes. Straight up voter disenfranchisement. It's bad enough that the Republican party engages in voter suppression and gerrymandering, but this?...is straight up theft..and sedition.

How is making a person vote in person and prove they are eligible to vote voter surpression?

States made the election rules. There are states that have used mail in voting for years without incident. The military has used it for decades.
Voting in person (especially during a pandemic) may not be possible for everyone. Hence, a way for Republicans to practice voter suppression.
Everyone who cast a vote was eligible. 73 million of the morons voted for Trump.

Your man lost. And you're pissed. I get it. But this behavior is just un-American.

You just like mail in voting because it makes it easier to cheat, and you know your side has no issues with cheating.

Maybe you can explain how it is possible to cheat in a mail in ballot?

Do millions of soldiers and sailors cheat every year when they vote by mail?

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

How do you stuff ballots when each ballot has a unique bar code traceable to a registered voter?

If ballots were stuffed, multiple votes would show up for registered voters.......There were no instances of that happening

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

Harvesting is going around picking up unused ballots and sending them in.

So how about after the election we do a full count and comparison? I have a feeling many of these have already been destroyed to cover up.

How does one pick up unused ballots?
Do you go door to door?

Why are there no reports of widespread soliciting of unused ballots?

You are just making shit up

Well lets investigate to find out. Start with back-checking samples of mailed ballot envelopes and ask the people if they did mail the ballots in or not.

Match exactly the envelope counts to the ballot counts. full review.

Well lets investigate to find out. Start with back-checking samples of mailed ballot envelopes and ask the people if they did mail the ballots in or not.

Match exactly the envelope counts to the ballot counts. full review.

Derp...
That is done as part of the counting process when envelopes are verified and opened. A ballot without a corresponding envelope would not be counted.
How else do you imagine they could ever certify their elections without these safeguards in place?
Your visions of poorly photocopied ballots with fake voters is impossible.

Since obervers were kept away, how would anyone know whether ballot without a corresponding envelope was counted?

Since obervers were kept away, how would anyone know whether ballot without a corresponding envelope was counted?

No one was kept away, dope. The system would know. In person ballots have a corresponding voter just as the mail in ballots do. No one has proven otherwise.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

I have faith in our Conservative court to not only reject this ridiculous claim but to admonish EVERY Republican who endorses it.

Why should Republicans be "admonished" for protesting against stolen elections? There is really little point in spending the time or money to run for office if you are going to be swindled.

Further, no one will contribute to an election campaign that has no chance of succeeding because of fraud.

Because it wasn't stolen. For the first time in many election cycles, the Republican tactic of voter suppression was largely removed. Granted, it was because of the pandemic (which I'd like to point out was made worse by the lack of response from the WH and impeded by the Republican party). Individual states made their own election rules. It is up to the state to set those rules. If you truly believe in the Constitution, then you believe in state's rights. If not, it's just bullshit talk. You believe in selective interpretation. For the SC to rule in Texas favor, it would have to throw out and invalidate millions of legally cast votes. Straight up voter disenfranchisement. It's bad enough that the Republican party engages in voter suppression and gerrymandering, but this?...is straight up theft..and sedition.

How is making a person vote in person and prove they are eligible to vote voter surpression?

States made the election rules. There are states that have used mail in voting for years without incident. The military has used it for decades.
Voting in person (especially during a pandemic) may not be possible for everyone. Hence, a way for Republicans to practice voter suppression.
Everyone who cast a vote was eligible. 73 million of the morons voted for Trump.

Your man lost. And you're pissed. I get it. But this behavior is just un-American.

You just like mail in voting because it makes it easier to cheat, and you know your side has no issues with cheating.

Maybe you can explain how it is possible to cheat in a mail in ballot?

Do millions of soldiers and sailors cheat every year when they vote by mail?

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

How do you stuff ballots when each ballot has a unique bar code traceable to a registered voter?

If ballots were stuffed, multiple votes would show up for registered voters.......There were no instances of that happening

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

Harvesting is going around picking up unused ballots and sending them in.

So how about after the election we do a full count and comparison? I have a feeling many of these have already been destroyed to cover up.

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

That is not true at least in MI and PA. The outer envelope has the voter’s name and signature the ballot does not but both share the same number. The ballot is anonymous as it has no name on it for any counter to see. Different people verify and open the envelopes than those counting the ballots.

So count and match every single ballot and prove there was no fraud.

That's already been done. In GA's case..it's been done three times.
How many do overs you lookin for here?

its this simple. Trump got more votes than any other sitting president in history, yet the count had him behind.
Doesnt speak volumes but raises an eyebrow.
Enough to find out how that happened.
Not a big deal. But for some reason, the left is OK with it.

I get it.

You won.

But when the tallies were different 4 years ago, it was worthy of inveestigation...at the cost of 25 million.

Gee....I wonder how many winter coats for those freezing kids in Chicago 25 million would buy.

Hmmm.

Except Biden got 7 million more votes than Trump.
Not seeing how that translates into a win for Trump.

 

[SC Patriot]

I must have hit a nerve. All the usual suspects came stampeding out of the barn like it was on fire.

Yeah, you’ll forgive us if after these allegations have been slapped down in literally dozens of lawsuits that we are getting a little sick of this shit.

What the Texas lawsuit states happened
Did happen, that is not in dispute
Will the court, follow the law.

Never know with courts and juries.

They state a lot of things “might” have happened and that “might” somehow is sufficient reason to rewrite election law or trash the constitutional rights of people who voted in our Republic.

Nope

You should have read the lawsuit. Don't blame me for your ignorance.

My guess is you didnt.
I know exactly what the suit is about.
Do you?
18 States feel their citizens votes were offset by the votes of 4 states where the legislative body of those states did not change the law. Instead the governors and the courts of that state allowed for the change of the law.
That is unconstitutional and truth is, will set a really bad precedent for our future.
A governor is responsible to enforce state law. A court is responsible to ensure the law is constitutional. Neither body has the right to change the law. Only lawmakers have that right.

Curious....there is a 6-3 right leaning SCOTUS.....more likely 5-4 seeing as Roberts is more in the middle leaning left.

Would you be OK with that court changing laws?

I wouldn't be...even though I am a conservative.

Honestly, the suit is about a great many things. Paxton didn't really engage in any editing, preferring instead to throw the spaghetti at the wall.

In a lot of instances of this supposed unconstitutional change, they're flatly wrong. In a lot of instances, the law was silent about certain procedures or policies and that therefore goes to the state's executive to implement laws with their discretion in such ambiguity. In other instances, the state's laws were determined to be unconstitutional and the courts ruled that the election law had to be changed as a result. In other instances, the governor used delegated authorities by emergency powers to alter state regulations in the setting of a pandemic.

Other states did this too, such as Texas, however they're not asking to have the courts take away their electoral votes because they voted for Trump. No, only four states who voted for Biden are being targeted.

This isn't about constitutionality and principle, it's about virtue signaling to Trump supporters. If it were about principle, there would be a lot more states named in the lawsuit.

If you are against the court's changing laws, then you should know that this VERY lawsuit is asking the SCOTUS to change the laws. So much for consistency.

well said, but I believe you may be wrong. It seems to me that this suit is not asking SCOTUS to change laws. It is asking them to interpret law. One can apply an executive order. But not if it is in direct conflict of written law. Does it apply here? I dont know. Neither do you. Based on your post, you are obviously intelligent. I believe I am as well...(although my wife calls me a dumbass but I regress).. But do either of us know constitutional law as the justices do? I doubt it. Let them decide. It may not be a valid suit. I really dont know. But with my limited knowledge of constitutional law, I believe it is worthy of consideration. My biggest concern is what kind of precedent will be set if the SCOTUS allows governors to "change" law. That can be very scary for all of us.

If you read the lawsuit, it's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact that the lawsuit is asking SCOTUS to delay the meeting of the electors which is currently set for Monday and which was determined by Congress as stipulated in the Constitution.

There's a process for challenging executive orders, and in some cases, that process occurred. Waiting until after the votes have cast to cry foul is not okay with me.

I respect you sentiments. I happen to disagree, but I understand your position.

Why would anyone respect Colfax? He's a lying moron.

I have no idea who he/she is. This is a blind debate board. I read his/her post and I understood his/her position. I dont necessarily agree, but if the tables were turned I may have felt the same way.
You see, I debate to learn. Not to demean my opponent. Except for Jillian. She is a proven liar about who she is. She inadvertently admitted it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I'm not going to bothering reading the thread ... looks like the same vomit from yesterday ...

Anyone dared comment on the merits of the case yet? ... the OP is crazy wrong ... if we let Texas dictate how Michigan interprets their own laws ... pfffft ... worst, allow Texas to go straight to SCOTUS ... well ... then ... er ...

What's to stop California from telling Mississippi how to run their education system? ... and going straight to SCOTUS with the complaint ...

No ... I didn';t think anyone wanted to discuss this matter honestly ... sorry for interrupting ...

This is what annoys me the worst. I know this is a Hail Mary and it has no chance of overturning the election, but the fact that Texas even had a path to take this directly to the SC with 1) no successful lower court rulings, and 2) Able to file a lawsuit that essentially is looking to interfere in another states' affairs....is a complete travesty.

So you have no idea about how multiple state issues are resolved. It goes directly to the supreme court. Always. Always. Always.
You are not worthy of adding to this conversation as you are naive as to how a republic works.

FYI....we are a republic.

I laugh at those that attempt to debate and say things that are not factually correct. Its like "Rachel Maddow said this so I can regirgitate it
There IS no issue, snowflake. That's the point. This is frivolous. Texas has NO standing to question another state's process. They suffered no harm.
So do me a favor and stow your upturned nose. I don't give a shit.

Oh. I see. A state voted legally, and their electoral college votes are offset by a state that votes against the constitution. Got it.
Good for you.

So what you're really trying to say here is that state's DON'T have the right to make their own laws. Again, selective interpretation. So much for that yellowed scrap of paper.
Texas wasn't harmed therefore has no standing to bring the suit...unless you are postulating that because Texas voted for Trump, these other states have to as well.

Uh...excuse me. I never said that. States get to make their own laws. Always. Governors and judges do not have the right to change those laws according to the constitution. Only LAW MAKERS do.
Know your stuff before you debate.

No chance

This really isn't going to happen.

You guys really need to calm down. Go out and get some air. Spend the day in a forest with no cell phone.

Yep, just let the cheating happen, after all Progs know what's best for us because we don't.

Yep, just let the cheating happen, after all Progs know what's best for us because we don't.

Cheating?
All 50 governors have certified their election results.

Yes. All states certified the results. I expected that. The question is, should states have their electoral college numbers offset by states that had non law makers change their election laws? And 18 governors and AG's are protecting their state citizens from having their vote offset.
Analogy.....

During a football game, there were 3 calls turned over by instant replay review. The last play of the game, where a player scored the winning touchdown, there was question whether or not his foot stepped on the sideline. It was an SEC team vs. an ACC game. You are an ACC fan. It was an SEC player that scored the apparent touchdown. The head ref decides to amend the rules and claims "we will not review the last play of a game"......would you not question what the hell and be upset about the mid game change of rules??

Now...that is a lousy football game. What about the election of a President of the United States?

Yes. All states certified the results. I expected that. The question is, should states have their electoral college numbers offset by states that had non law makers change their election laws?

Which states had, “non law makers change their election laws”?

The four states named in the suit.
Pay attention

The four states named in the suit.
Pay attention

Answer the question. Which laws in which states were changed illegally, when and by whom?

 

[ReinyDays]

Texas has filed a Reply to the PA Answer

Texas continues to maintain they have a right to tell PA how to run their elections ... this time citing the atrocities of King George III ... requests to file amicus briefs continue to pour in ...

 

[SC Patriot]

I have faith in our Conservative court to not only reject this ridiculous claim but to admonish EVERY Republican who endorses it.

Why should Republicans be "admonished" for protesting against stolen elections? There is really little point in spending the time or money to run for office if you are going to be swindled.

Further, no one will contribute to an election campaign that has no chance of succeeding because of fraud.

Because it wasn't stolen. For the first time in many election cycles, the Republican tactic of voter suppression was largely removed. Granted, it was because of the pandemic (which I'd like to point out was made worse by the lack of response from the WH and impeded by the Republican party). Individual states made their own election rules. It is up to the state to set those rules. If you truly believe in the Constitution, then you believe in state's rights. If not, it's just bullshit talk. You believe in selective interpretation. For the SC to rule in Texas favor, it would have to throw out and invalidate millions of legally cast votes. Straight up voter disenfranchisement. It's bad enough that the Republican party engages in voter suppression and gerrymandering, but this?...is straight up theft..and sedition.

How is making a person vote in person and prove they are eligible to vote voter surpression?

States made the election rules. There are states that have used mail in voting for years without incident. The military has used it for decades.
Voting in person (especially during a pandemic) may not be possible for everyone. Hence, a way for Republicans to practice voter suppression.
Everyone who cast a vote was eligible. 73 million of the morons voted for Trump.

Your man lost. And you're pissed. I get it. But this behavior is just un-American.

You just like mail in voting because it makes it easier to cheat, and you know your side has no issues with cheating.

Maybe you can explain how it is possible to cheat in a mail in ballot?

Do millions of soldiers and sailors cheat every year when they vote by mail?

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

How do you stuff ballots when each ballot has a unique bar code traceable to a registered voter?

If ballots were stuffed, multiple votes would show up for registered voters.......There were no instances of that happening

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

Harvesting is going around picking up unused ballots and sending them in.

So how about after the election we do a full count and comparison? I have a feeling many of these have already been destroyed to cover up.

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

That is not true at least in MI and PA. The outer envelope has the voter’s name and signature the ballot does not but both share the same number. The ballot is anonymous as it has no name on it for any counter to see. Different people verify and open the envelopes than those counting the ballots.

So count and match every single ballot and prove there was no fraud.

That's already been done. In GA's case..it's been done three times.
How many do overs you lookin for here?

its this simple. Trump got more votes than any other sitting president in history, yet the count had him behind.
Doesnt speak volumes but raises an eyebrow.
Enough to find out how that happened.
Not a big deal. But for some reason, the left is OK with it.

I get it.

You won.

But when the tallies were different 4 years ago, it was worthy of inveestigation...at the cost of 25 million.

Gee....I wonder how many winter coats for those freezing kids in Chicago 25 million would buy.

Hmmm.

Except Biden got 7 million more votes than Trump.
Not seeing how that translates into a win for Trump.

It doesn't. But it gives reason to question why so many more people voted this year than any other. Not saying anything nefarious was done. Just questioning whether or not something unusual happened. No matter who was on top, when you have so many more people voting than ever before it gives reason to pause.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I have faith in our Conservative court to not only reject this ridiculous claim but to admonish EVERY Republican who endorses it.

Why should Republicans be "admonished" for protesting against stolen elections? There is really little point in spending the time or money to run for office if you are going to be swindled.

Further, no one will contribute to an election campaign that has no chance of succeeding because of fraud.

Because it wasn't stolen. For the first time in many election cycles, the Republican tactic of voter suppression was largely removed. Granted, it was because of the pandemic (which I'd like to point out was made worse by the lack of response from the WH and impeded by the Republican party). Individual states made their own election rules. It is up to the state to set those rules. If you truly believe in the Constitution, then you believe in state's rights. If not, it's just bullshit talk. You believe in selective interpretation. For the SC to rule in Texas favor, it would have to throw out and invalidate millions of legally cast votes. Straight up voter disenfranchisement. It's bad enough that the Republican party engages in voter suppression and gerrymandering, but this?...is straight up theft..and sedition.

How is making a person vote in person and prove they are eligible to vote voter surpression?

States made the election rules. There are states that have used mail in voting for years without incident. The military has used it for decades.
Voting in person (especially during a pandemic) may not be possible for everyone. Hence, a way for Republicans to practice voter suppression.
Everyone who cast a vote was eligible. 73 million of the morons voted for Trump.

Your man lost. And you're pissed. I get it. But this behavior is just un-American.

You just like mail in voting because it makes it easier to cheat, and you know your side has no issues with cheating.

Maybe you can explain how it is possible to cheat in a mail in ballot?

Do millions of soldiers and sailors cheat every year when they vote by mail?

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

Which states sent ballots to every voter without a request?

What makes mail in ballots untraceable?

NJ for one sent out plenty.

How about we match every ballot to every shipped envelope, and do check to see if those people actually mailed the ballots?

NJ for one sent out plenty.

How about we match every ballot to every shipped envelope, and do check to see if those people actually mailed the ballots?

Yes, one.
Not one in question or contested in any Trump lawsuits.

So what are you arguing then?

I am arguing that I don't trust the election results and want full investigations.

I am arguing that I don't trust the election results and want full investigations.

No. You made up assertions of widespread fraud that didn’t exist.

 

[SC Patriot]

I'm not going to bothering reading the thread ... looks like the same vomit from yesterday ...

Anyone dared comment on the merits of the case yet? ... the OP is crazy wrong ... if we let Texas dictate how Michigan interprets their own laws ... pfffft ... worst, allow Texas to go straight to SCOTUS ... well ... then ... er ...

What's to stop California from telling Mississippi how to run their education system? ... and going straight to SCOTUS with the complaint ...

No ... I didn';t think anyone wanted to discuss this matter honestly ... sorry for interrupting ...

This is what annoys me the worst. I know this is a Hail Mary and it has no chance of overturning the election, but the fact that Texas even had a path to take this directly to the SC with 1) no successful lower court rulings, and 2) Able to file a lawsuit that essentially is looking to interfere in another states' affairs....is a complete travesty.

So you have no idea about how multiple state issues are resolved. It goes directly to the supreme court. Always. Always. Always.
You are not worthy of adding to this conversation as you are naive as to how a republic works.

FYI....we are a republic.

I laugh at those that attempt to debate and say things that are not factually correct. Its like "Rachel Maddow said this so I can regirgitate it
There IS no issue, snowflake. That's the point. This is frivolous. Texas has NO standing to question another state's process. They suffered no harm.
So do me a favor and stow your upturned nose. I don't give a shit.

Oh. I see. A state voted legally, and their electoral college votes are offset by a state that votes against the constitution. Got it.
Good for you.

So what you're really trying to say here is that state's DON'T have the right to make their own laws. Again, selective interpretation. So much for that yellowed scrap of paper.
Texas wasn't harmed therefore has no standing to bring the suit...unless you are postulating that because Texas voted for Trump, these other states have to as well.

Uh...excuse me. I never said that. States get to make their own laws. Always. Governors and judges do not have the right to change those laws according to the constitution. Only LAW MAKERS do.
Know your stuff before you debate.

No chance

This really isn't going to happen.

You guys really need to calm down. Go out and get some air. Spend the day in a forest with no cell phone.

Yep, just let the cheating happen, after all Progs know what's best for us because we don't.

Yep, just let the cheating happen, after all Progs know what's best for us because we don't.

Cheating?
All 50 governors have certified their election results.

Yes. All states certified the results. I expected that. The question is, should states have their electoral college numbers offset by states that had non law makers change their election laws? And 18 governors and AG's are protecting their state citizens from having their vote offset.
Analogy.....

During a football game, there were 3 calls turned over by instant replay review. The last play of the game, where a player scored the winning touchdown, there was question whether or not his foot stepped on the sideline. It was an SEC team vs. an ACC game. You are an ACC fan. It was an SEC player that scored the apparent touchdown. The head ref decides to amend the rules and claims "we will not review the last play of a game"......would you not question what the hell and be upset about the mid game change of rules??

Now...that is a lousy football game. What about the election of a President of the United States?

Yes. All states certified the results. I expected that. The question is, should states have their electoral college numbers offset by states that had non law makers change their election laws?

Which states had, “non law makers change their election laws”?

The four states named in the suit.
Pay attention

The four states named in the suit.
Pay attention

Answer the question. Which laws in which states were changed illegally, when and by whom?

I answered that. You just opt to ignore the answer. I am OK with that.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

This really isn't going to happen.

You guys really need to calm down. Go out and get some air. Spend the day in a forest with no cell phone.

Yep, just let the cheating happen, after all Progs know what's best for us because we don't.

Yep, just let the cheating happen, after all Progs know what's best for us because we don't.

Cheating?
All 50 governors have certified their election results.

right, and 8 of them are cheating.

right, and 8 of them are cheating.

So those governor lied then?

Yes

Yes

So..... the conspiracy grows.

 

[colfax_m]

I must have hit a nerve. All the usual suspects came stampeding out of the barn like it was on fire.

Yeah, you’ll forgive us if after these allegations have been slapped down in literally dozens of lawsuits that we are getting a little sick of this shit.

What the Texas lawsuit states happened
Did happen, that is not in dispute
Will the court, follow the law.

Never know with courts and juries.

They state a lot of things “might” have happened and that “might” somehow is sufficient reason to rewrite election law or trash the constitutional rights of people who voted in our Republic.

Nope

You should have read the lawsuit. Don't blame me for your ignorance.

My guess is you didnt.
I know exactly what the suit is about.
Do you?
18 States feel their citizens votes were offset by the votes of 4 states where the legislative body of those states did not change the law. Instead the governors and the courts of that state allowed for the change of the law.
That is unconstitutional and truth is, will set a really bad precedent for our future.
A governor is responsible to enforce state law. A court is responsible to ensure the law is constitutional. Neither body has the right to change the law. Only lawmakers have that right.

Curious....there is a 6-3 right leaning SCOTUS.....more likely 5-4 seeing as Roberts is more in the middle leaning left.

Would you be OK with that court changing laws?

I wouldn't be...even though I am a conservative.

Honestly, the suit is about a great many things. Paxton didn't really engage in any editing, preferring instead to throw the spaghetti at the wall.

In a lot of instances of this supposed unconstitutional change, they're flatly wrong. In a lot of instances, the law was silent about certain procedures or policies and that therefore goes to the state's executive to implement laws with their discretion in such ambiguity. In other instances, the state's laws were determined to be unconstitutional and the courts ruled that the election law had to be changed as a result. In other instances, the governor used delegated authorities by emergency powers to alter state regulations in the setting of a pandemic.

Other states did this too, such as Texas, however they're not asking to have the courts take away their electoral votes because they voted for Trump. No, only four states who voted for Biden are being targeted.

This isn't about constitutionality and principle, it's about virtue signaling to Trump supporters. If it were about principle, there would be a lot more states named in the lawsuit.

If you are against the court's changing laws, then you should know that this VERY lawsuit is asking the SCOTUS to change the laws. So much for consistency.

well said, but I believe you may be wrong. It seems to me that this suit is not asking SCOTUS to change laws. It is asking them to interpret law. One can apply an executive order. But not if it is in direct conflict of written law. Does it apply here? I dont know. Neither do you. Based on your post, you are obviously intelligent. I believe I am as well...(although my wife calls me a dumbass but I regress).. But do either of us know constitutional law as the justices do? I doubt it. Let them decide. It may not be a valid suit. I really dont know. But with my limited knowledge of constitutional law, I believe it is worthy of consideration. My biggest concern is what kind of precedent will be set if the SCOTUS allows governors to "change" law. That can be very scary for all of us.

If you read the lawsuit, it's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact that the lawsuit is asking SCOTUS to delay the meeting of the electors which is currently set for Monday and which was determined by Congress as stipulated in the Constitution.

There's a process for challenging executive orders, and in some cases, that process occurred. Waiting until after the votes have cast to cry foul is not okay with me.

I respect you sentiments. I happen to disagree, but I understand your position.

Thank you, have a good one.

 

[bripat9643]

I have faith in our Conservative court to not only reject this ridiculous claim but to admonish EVERY Republican who endorses it.

Why should Republicans be "admonished" for protesting against stolen elections? There is really little point in spending the time or money to run for office if you are going to be swindled.

Further, no one will contribute to an election campaign that has no chance of succeeding because of fraud.

Because it wasn't stolen. For the first time in many election cycles, the Republican tactic of voter suppression was largely removed. Granted, it was because of the pandemic (which I'd like to point out was made worse by the lack of response from the WH and impeded by the Republican party). Individual states made their own election rules. It is up to the state to set those rules. If you truly believe in the Constitution, then you believe in state's rights. If not, it's just bullshit talk. You believe in selective interpretation. For the SC to rule in Texas favor, it would have to throw out and invalidate millions of legally cast votes. Straight up voter disenfranchisement. It's bad enough that the Republican party engages in voter suppression and gerrymandering, but this?...is straight up theft..and sedition.

How is making a person vote in person and prove they are eligible to vote voter surpression?

States made the election rules. There are states that have used mail in voting for years without incident. The military has used it for decades.
Voting in person (especially during a pandemic) may not be possible for everyone. Hence, a way for Republicans to practice voter suppression.
Everyone who cast a vote was eligible. 73 million of the morons voted for Trump.

Your man lost. And you're pissed. I get it. But this behavior is just un-American.

You just like mail in voting because it makes it easier to cheat, and you know your side has no issues with cheating.

Maybe you can explain how it is possible to cheat in a mail in ballot?

Do millions of soldiers and sailors cheat every year when they vote by mail?

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

How do you stuff ballots when each ballot has a unique bar code traceable to a registered voter?

If ballots were stuffed, multiple votes would show up for registered voters.......There were no instances of that happening

Each outer envelope is unique, the ballots are not as they have to be anonymous.

Harvesting is going around picking up unused ballots and sending them in.

So how about after the election we do a full count and comparison? I have a feeling many of these have already been destroyed to cover up.

How does one pick up unused ballots?
Do you go door to door?

Why are there no reports of widespread soliciting of unused ballots?

You are just making shit up

Well lets investigate to find out. Start with back-checking samples of mailed ballot envelopes and ask the people if they did mail the ballots in or not.

Match exactly the envelope counts to the ballot counts. full review.

Well lets investigate to find out. Start with back-checking samples of mailed ballot envelopes and ask the people if they did mail the ballots in or not.

Match exactly the envelope counts to the ballot counts. full review.

Derp...
That is done as part of the counting process when envelopes are verified and opened. A ballot without a corresponding envelope would not be counted.
How else do you imagine they could ever certify their elections without these safeguards in place?
Your visions of poorly photocopied ballots with fake voters is impossible.

Since obervers were kept away, how would anyone know whether ballot without a corresponding envelope was counted?

Since obervers were kept away, how would anyone know whether ballot without a corresponding envelope was counted?

No one was kept away, dope. The system would know. In person ballots have a corresponding voter just as the mail in ballots do. No one has proven otherwise.

There are hundreds of affidavits saying otherwise, moron. We even have video of GA election officials sending all the observers home. You claim is irrelevant to the fact that no one observed the absentee ballots being opened.

 

[colfax_m]

The SC overrides Congress almost daily.

Only when they're laws are unconstitutional.

What could possibly be unconstitutional about Congress setting the day that the electors are supposed to vote?

 

[martybegan]

I have faith in our Conservative court to not only reject this ridiculous claim but to admonish EVERY Republican who endorses it.

Why should Republicans be "admonished" for protesting against stolen elections? There is really little point in spending the time or money to run for office if you are going to be swindled.

Further, no one will contribute to an election campaign that has no chance of succeeding because of fraud.

Because it wasn't stolen. For the first time in many election cycles, the Republican tactic of voter suppression was largely removed. Granted, it was because of the pandemic (which I'd like to point out was made worse by the lack of response from the WH and impeded by the Republican party). Individual states made their own election rules. It is up to the state to set those rules. If you truly believe in the Constitution, then you believe in state's rights. If not, it's just bullshit talk. You believe in selective interpretation. For the SC to rule in Texas favor, it would have to throw out and invalidate millions of legally cast votes. Straight up voter disenfranchisement. It's bad enough that the Republican party engages in voter suppression and gerrymandering, but this?...is straight up theft..and sedition.

How is making a person vote in person and prove they are eligible to vote voter surpression?

States made the election rules. There are states that have used mail in voting for years without incident. The military has used it for decades.
Voting in person (especially during a pandemic) may not be possible for everyone. Hence, a way for Republicans to practice voter suppression.
Everyone who cast a vote was eligible. 73 million of the morons voted for Trump.

Your man lost. And you're pissed. I get it. But this behavior is just un-American.

You just like mail in voting because it makes it easier to cheat, and you know your side has no issues with cheating.

Maybe you can explain how it is possible to cheat in a mail in ballot?

Do millions of soldiers and sailors cheat every year when they vote by mail?

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

harvesting is the biggest one.

Usually mail in ballots are requested, which allows for tracing.

It adds also the chance for stuffing in the counting rooms, by increasing the paper count.

Which states sent ballots to every voter without a request?

What makes mail in ballots untraceable?

NJ for one sent out plenty.

How about we match every ballot to every shipped envelope, and do check to see if those people actually mailed the ballots?

NJ for one sent out plenty.

How about we match every ballot to every shipped envelope, and do check to see if those people actually mailed the ballots?

Yes, one.
Not one in question or contested in any Trump lawsuits.

So what are you arguing then?

I am arguing that I don't trust the election results and want full investigations.

I am arguing that I don't trust the election results and want full investigations.

No. You made up assertions of widespread fraud that didn’t exist.

I am making accusations based on what I have seen.