PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
still can't read I see......why do you not condemn lib'rul pubic education when it has left you illiterate?......
what did you think these words meant?......
Why should we let votes overturn an election? Because that is what an election is?
- Thread starter Walt
- Start date
still can't read I see......why do you not condemn lib'rul pubic education when it has left you illiterate?......
what did you think these words meant?......
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
thank you.....be honest, you are BucKKleon aren't you......
Your questions completely ignore reality and the law.
Each state sets its own rules as to how the vote count occurs. All states don't certify the vote until at least a week after the election and some of them could take a month or more. The reason for that is because the process is built to check and double check that the vote count is correct. This is never done on the same day that voting occurs. The vote totals that are given out on election day are not certified. They are never complete and often contain minor errors in the counts.
As to votes that "trickle in". That is just nonsense on your part. How and when votes are received and how they are counted requires laws and rules. Laws are passed by legislatures. Rules are set up by the Secretary of State under the laws giving authority to do so. Most states allow for leeway in voting if there is some impediment to voting. If a hurricane occurs on voting day or a pandemic is ongoing there is a valid reason to try to allow people to vote.
Voting is the only right that is declared a right 4 times in the US Constitution. Do you have a problem with people exercising their constitutional rights guaranteed by the US Constitution? Unless you have some evidence you can present a court that is valid there is no reason to ask the court to not allow states to count the ballots fairly and honestly.
Except for the fact that we have evidence of states not being able to mail out ballots in a timely fashion and evidence of people not receiving ballots that were allegedly mailed to them. Just look at the problems that occurred in the primary in many states.
When the voter does not receive a ballot then they hardly have ample time to cast their vote by mail. Your argument is specious and disputed by facts. Secretaries of State have stated they are having problems mailing out ballots on time for a number of reasons.
Do you feel that the country hasn't been given sufficient time and resources to vote in a timely manner..and count votes fairly and honestly?? Why should absentee ballots that "flow in" after election day be counted?
They've had ample time....Most people don't need to vote by mail, after all....
John Barron
Verified User
So if Trump is losing at midnight will he say it is because they stopped counting? Will he then take it to SC to make them count the late votes? Will the SC then change their mind?
TexanManWithPlans
Verified User
If a voter does not register to vote by mail, in time to vote, it’s the voter fault. Be on time next time.
Votes that arrive a year after the cut off should be counted?
Good grief.
"You people" don't think well. No argument is worth piss that relies on a single "demmycrat fuckwit" unless it is that the person making the argument, and slurring to do it, is
not particularly intelligent. On your point though, when voters have to stand in line for hours the number of polling places is insufficient.
not particularly intelligent. On your point though, when voters have to stand in line for hours the number of polling places is insufficient.
Absentee ballots are always counted. It often takes a while but the counting of absentee ballots are why you will see vote totals changing for a month after the election.
The race is usually called before absentee ballots are counted because the number of ballots is often less than the vote difference between candidates.
If you think a particular state doesn't count absentee ballots then name the state and I will find the law.
That is utter nonsense.
Ballots sent through the mail have to meet the standards required by the state.
The voter has to be registered
Signature has to match.
In most cases the bar code on the envelope will have to match the one sent to the voter.
The ballot has to be an official ballot sent to the voter.
The Post Office can't just manufacture ballots out of thin air that meet the requirements.
Why should we let invalid votes overturn an election? We should not.
Mail-in ballots without a signature (or in some cases, without a postmark) that are "discovered" after the legally-defined deadline are invalid.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has entered the chat.
Who closed hundreds of polling places using the Wu Flu boogeyman as an excuse?
Hint: it wasn't President Trump.
https://www.hrw.org/report/2020/09/22/what-democracy-looks/protecting-voting-rights-us-during-covid-19-pandemic
https://apnews.com/article/3128f5bd08f6fbca8ac97c5d862383c1
If there are sufficient time and resources then why are their voting lines that require people to wait for hours in order to vote?
If one area has a 15 minute wait max and another has a 3 - 4 hour wait, doesn't that tell you that the resources are not sufficient in all areas?
Ballots should be counted based on the law. Why do you think the laws don't matter?
If the law states that a ballot must be postmarked on or before election day and received no later than 7 days after election day, do you think all those ballots that meet the law should be counted?
Let's look at some of the states you seem to think are creating this "flow in" of ballots.
This is only a partial list -
Alaska - postmarked by Nov 3
Iowa - postmarked by Nov 2
Illinois - postmarked by Nov 3
Kansas - postmarked by Nov 3
Kentucky - postmarked by Nov 3
Mississippi - postmarked by Nov 3
Montana - postmarked by Nov 3
Nevada - postmarked by Nov 3
New Jersey - postmarked by Nov 3
Are you accusing Kansas, Mississippi and Montana of not being fair by allowing ballots to be mailed on election day with no restriction date for receiving the ballot?
Irrelevant.
It's true that until 1937, presidents were not sworn in until March 4 because it took so long to count and report ballots.
But for the first 50 years of American elections, most voting wasn’t done in private and voters didn’t even make their choice on a paper ballot. Instead, voters went to the local courthouse and publicly cast their vote out loud.
Known as “viva voce”, this conspicuous form of public voting was the law in most states through the early 19th century and Kentucky kept it up as late as 1891. As voters arrived at the courthouse, a judge would have them swear on a Bible that they were who they said they were and that they hadn’t already voted. Once sworn in, the voter would call out his name to the clerk and announce his chosen candidates in each race.
Elections in the voice-voting era commanded turnout rates as high as 85 percent.
The first paper ballots began appearing in the early 19th century, but they weren’t standardized or even printed by government elections officials. In the beginning, paper ballots were nothing more than scraps of paper upon which the voter scrawled his candidates' names and dropped into the ballot box. Newspapers began to print out blank ballots with the titles of each office up for vote which readers could tear out and fill in with their chosen candidates.
Then the political parties got savvy. By the mid-19th century, DEMOCRAT party officials would distribute pre-printed fliers to voters listing only their party’s candidates for office. They were called “tickets” because the small rectangles of paper resembled 19th-century train tickets. Party faithful could legally use the pre-printed ticket as their actual ballot making it easier than ever to vote straight down the party line.
Partisan paper ballots ruled the second half of the 19th-century, leading to frequent accusations of voter fraud and calls for election reform. The solution came from Australia, which pioneered the first standardized, government-printed paper ballot in 1858.
The so-called Australian paper ballot, which was printed with the names of all candidates and handed to voters at the polling place, was first adopted in the United States by New York and Massachusetts in 1888.
In the late 19th-century, Jacob H. Myers invented his lever-operated “Automatic Booth” voting machine, an engineering marvel that would come to dominate American elections from 1910 through 1980.
Myers’ groundbreaking contraption had more moving parts than any other machine of its day, including the automobile. These early voting machines weighed hundreds of pounds, cost thousands of dollars and would be installed in the corner of the local town hall for decades.
Voting on one of these lever machines was easy. Each candidate for each race had a small lever next to his or her name and Americans voted by pulling down the levers of their chosen candidates. If they wanted to vote along a single party line, they could pull one lever that automatically selected the candidates.
Inside the machine, the vote-counting process was incredibly complex. There were 200 or more levers on the face of the machine, and behind each lever were mechanisms that prevented the vote from being counted until the final lever was pulled (in case a voter changed their mind). The straight party levers had to be linked to every candidate lever on the ticket and none of it required a single watt of electricity.
The only power required was muscle power to pull down the small levers to vote for candidates and then more muscle power to move the great big lever that opened and closed the curtain. Unbeknownst to most voters, the action of opening the curtain on the voting booth was what finally counted the votes and reset the machine for the next voter.
https://www.history.com/news/voting-elections-ballots-electronic
Not one of those states said ballots could be mailed 14 days after the election and still count.
NY said the ballots could be received 2 days after election. I don't see how anyone could mail a ballot 14 days after the election and still have it arrive only 2 days after the election.
Wisconsin was requiring they be received 6 days after the election. I don't see how anyone could mail a ballot 14 days after the election and still have it arrive only 6 days after the election.
Michigan required that postmark show the ballot be mailed Nov 2 which is one day before the election but could be received 14 days after.
I think floridafan is correct in that you lied about anyone trying to allow ballots be mailed 14 days after the election.
Invalid argument.
Ballot deadlines and voting laws are determined by each state's legislature.
What has happened recently is a spate of DEMOCRAT-backed court cases seeking to nullify state election laws by judicial fiat, particularly in battleground states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
But you knew that, didn't you?