Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Michigan ballot dumps
- Thread starter MuntCuffin
- Start date
realsquash
Well-known member
A lively debate? Calling for your head? Not!
Denial perhaps?
SanDiegoCJ
Non-Lemming
And that doesn't make it wrong or unconstitutional, it just means that you (not you specifically) don't like it. If it's truly unconstitutional SCOTUS has to say so. If they don't, it's constitutional. That's as per COTUS.
SanDiegoCJ
Non-Lemming
Very much this. If anything comes out of this election there has to be a very serious upgrading of election security so confidence is restored in the process.
Not arguing but pointing out that a chance to do exactly this was denied by the SCOTUS. The court declined to hear the Texas (?) lawsuit that 4 states did not follow the US Constitution when they changed their voting laws by executive, not legislative action. And this change allowed many of the ballot irregularities that are alleged. Right ?
I just read about that. Probably wont be heard until October
Epoch Times Article 5 lawsuits on 4 states
SanDiegoCJ
Non-Lemming
I'm torn about this. I seriously want the elections to be above reproach, but I don't like the idea of the federal government dictating to states how they can hold elections. My only hope is that some sort of meaningful compromise is reached.
realsquash
Well-known member
I happen to agree with you on that - and I know it's the states that fucked up this election.
realsquash
Well-known member
I'm all for arguments federally, but the states fucked up badly. The ones run by Republicans, largely.
Sterlingfire
ignant
So, if the states fucked up, who is the oversight for them? Is obviously not us, we aren't getting them to even entertain the idea of looking into voter fraud, let alone fix it... if this isn't the place for the Supreme Court to step in, then you might as well dismantle that portion of the system. If it won't uphold the constitution in this aspect, what makes you think they will/ have been?
Stuck
In Hell
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Member Number
- 424
- Messages
- 1,818
Thats absolutely the dumbest shit Ive ever seen you post. That is the equivalent of saying "even though you killed someone its not illegal because you didnt get caught". There are hundreds of cases a year that while unconstitutional dont get heard by SCOTUS either because of time or docket constraints or because it goes against the majority of judges political beliefs. If youre going to say you truly believe that all of the judges on the bench follow the COTUS 100% your either more senile than we believe or just a straight up lying piece of shit.
Sterlingfire
ignant
SanDiegoCJ
Non-Lemming
Unfortunately for you that's the way our system works, all according to COTUS. If the courts don't rule that a law is unconstitutional that means it's constitutional by default. You need a civics lesson.
Stuck
In Hell
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Member Number
- 424
- Messages
- 1,818
Really? Whats your legal background? Ever even been in court for anything other than a traffic ticket? Ever presented a case in federal court? No? Then fuck off.
By all means though please show me where COTUS says that if SCOTUS hasnt ruled on something its constitutional by default.
Last edited:
rockota
white collar hillbilly
- Joined
- May 28, 2020
- Member Number
- 1642
- Messages
- 3,788
his knowledge of COTUS is about as well versed as the average citizen's knowledge of open heart surgery....
The "logic" he uses in his own statements require a SCOTUS opinion for them to have any potential accuracy.
Ted_Kaczynski
On A Journey
Thefishguy77
Part time dumbass
Why are you asking a contrarian what his background is. He hasn’t mad a point or taken a stand since King George decided to raise taxes.
realsquash
Well-known member
Some states are taking this seriously. If people want to fix this they need to elect state reps that will do what they want. That's easier said than done. But most of the swing states are R legislatures, but some with D govs. They are taking it seriously. I haven't been paying close attention to any state outside of WI since the shitstorm, but you need to look up what is happening in your own state. I hate to say it, but the activism needs to be at the state level to fix all of these problems going forward. If you just want to rely on SCOTUS for everything then you've just given up your state rights argument.
California is, was tight with credible voter registration requiring proof of residency and identity. I watched and participated in my daughter and live in friend's first time voter registration as 18 yo. The state says it verifies signatures. I dont know how one would verify the verification. 
The legislature developed and approved the further mail in voting, AKA absentee ballots, that was enacted, not the governor, who signed off. Only problem was 65/35 Dem/Rep voting block.
I feel the SCOTUS was derelict in not holding the States to the Constitution. They could have done this, and it would have created the real shit stoorm that hasa been discussed in this BB. But they should have nipped the problem in the bud. As pointed out in other venues, no Republicans, none, opposed these voting changes until Trump lost. That makes it hypocritical to argus now. So what. I am hypocrite, I don't care.
The legislature developed and approved the further mail in voting, AKA absentee ballots, that was enacted, not the governor, who signed off. Only problem was 65/35 Dem/Rep voting block.I feel the SCOTUS was derelict in not holding the States to the Constitution. They could have done this, and it would have created the real shit stoorm that hasa been discussed in this BB. But they should have nipped the problem in the bud. As pointed out in other venues, no Republicans, none, opposed these voting changes until Trump lost. That makes it hypocritical to argus now. So what. I am hypocrite, I don't care.
SanDiegoCJ
Non-Lemming
Says the whiny little pussy who can't differentiate his butt hurt little feelers from facts. What I posted is factual, unlike the drivel you post.
Stuck
In Hell
- Joined
- May 20, 2020
- Member Number
- 424
- Messages
- 1,818
So if its factual, show where in COTUS it states that. That was the claim you made. Put up or shut up. SCOTUS not ruling on something is NOT the same as SCOTUS ruling that it is constitutional. It just means they havent ruled on it. I could actually make the opposite claim and it would be more accurate. Until it has been decided by SCOTUS it isnt constitutional its just a law or directive written by politicians. In the modern era I think We The People should be bringing every new piece of legislation and emporers I mean executive order before the court to establish legality and constitutionality. There are thousands of regulations on the books that are unconstitutional they just havent had their day in court.
Boss
Rabble-Rouser
Shared it on fake book. They flagged it for sexual content 
.... some sort of strange pervy Van fucker I guess.
.... some sort of strange pervy Van fucker I guess.
Sooo how many of these people voted? HMMMMM
Michigan voting roll lawsuit dismissed, 177,000 voter registrations to be canceled
http://www.iosconews.com/news/state/article_f9d3a4bf-5908-5dd9-be84-ab2c493734d6.html
Michigan voting roll lawsuit dismissed, 177,000 voter registrations to be canceled
http://www.iosconews.com/news/state/article_f9d3a4bf-5908-5dd9-be84-ab2c493734d6.html
realsquash
Well-known member
All of them, but there's no way to audit that.
Here's the best part of that story:
“It was clear when the suit was filed in June of last year when federal law barred most voter-list maintenance, that this was a press release masquerading as a lawsuit filed to undermine public confidence in the integrity of our elections,” Benson said in a statement. “The suit prompted no action from us. As we have said publicly all along, strong voter registration rates and accurate voter rolls are good for democracy.”
