Why should we let votes overturn an election? Because that is what an election is?

TOP said:
Do you feel that the country hasn't been given sufficient time and resources to vote in a timely manner? What's with the "trickle in" votes ? But hey.... Let's give everyone until Christmas to get them in...and offer those who've already cast a ballot the opportunity for a redo...many are coming to their senses.....
Click to expand...

If the authorities are too dishonest or too incompetent to count the legal votes on time, they should be sacked and the votes recounted by those who can.
 
TOP said:
Voters have had More than ample time to caste votes by mail....the will of the people has been completely respected....
There's no need or excuse to mail in a vote on election day...
Click to expand...

How about 2-3 days prior to Election Day. Shouldn't those votes be counted?
 
Iolo/Penderyn said:
If the authorities are too dishonest or too incompetent to count the legal votes on time, they should be sacked and the votes recounted by those who can.
Click to expand...

Translation: Unless the count produces a result I agree with they should recount until it does.
 
martin said:
You asked a small minded nitpicker's question. But to answer it the resources are not sufficient. There are insufficient polling places in large voting districts. Do you stand in line 8 to 12 hours to vote? No, huh. The number of drop off boxes is generally insufficient. The capacity of the postal service to deal with the avalanche of mail in ballots is proving to be insufficient. The election offices in many towns and cities are insufficiently staffed to count the ballots as they arrive and in some states the ballots aren't counted at all until election day. The system is swamped. It leaves us with two competing values. Do we value efficiency like bean counters or do we value the expressed will of the electorate? If we follow the examples of past elections dating back to the beginning of the country we will make the choice Americans will accept, but not if we don't.
Click to expand...

We value the expressed decisions of the Supreme Court, Marty.

That should be simple enough for even you to understand.

Oh, that court is now 6-3.
 
Last edited:
Iolo/Penderyn said:
If the authorities are too dishonest or too incompetent to count the legal votes on time, they should be sacked and the votes recounted by those who can.
Click to expand...

Since you can't vote in our elections, take a hike, America hating cabron.

Clean the goat mierda from your filthy streets.

Llandudno: Wild goats take over Welsh town amid coronavirus ...
www.cnn.com › wild-goats-wales-streets-lockdown-scli-gbr
Mar 31, 2020 — A coastal town in north Wales has found a whole new meaning to the phrase herd immunity, after goats were spotted roaming its quiet streets.
 
martin said:
Yeah, when you don't have an answer avoid the question and attack the questioner.
Click to expand...
We value the expressed decisions of the Supreme Court, Marty.

That should be simple enough for even you to understand.

Oh, that court is now 6-3.

Was this not simple enough for you to understand, Marty?
 
Quote Originally Posted by martin View Post
"You asked a small minded nitpicker's question."

Was this not an attack on the questioner, Marty?
 
CFM said:
Where does the Constitution say counting is supposed to take until December 15th? The Constitution says Congress shall determine the time of choosing electors and on the day they vote. Nothing about votes still being counted until 12/15.
Click to expand...

You are correct. The 20th Amendment says the Elector votes have to be in on January 3rd. By a law that goes back to the beginning of the USA, the Electors must meet in the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December, but that law could be changed. It does have to all be done by the 3rd of January... Or else change the Constitution.

Now can you show me any law or part of the Constitution that backs up the claim that all the voting must be done by midnight on election day? In the past, they used to not even start counting until the next morning. I say Kavanaugh has made up this law out of his own mind.
 
Walt said:
You are correct. The 20th Amendment says the Elector votes have to be in on January 3rd. By a law that goes back to the beginning of the USA, the Electors must meet in the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December, but that law could be changed. It does have to all be done by the 3rd of January... Or else change the Constitution.

Now can you show me any law or part of the Constitution that backs up the claim that all the voting must be done by midnight on election day? In the past, they used to not even start counting until the next morning. I say Kavanaugh has made up this law out of his own mind.
Click to expand...

The 20th amendment doesn't mention electors.

Never said it has to be done by midnight. For the same reasons the 20th amendment moved the date of inauguration, the vote CAN BE counted by midnight.

Show me in the 20th amendment where it says elector's votes have to be in on January 3rd.
 
Earl said:
We value the expressed decisions of the Supreme Court, Marty.

That should be simple enough for even you to understand.

Oh, that court is now 6-3.
Click to expand...

Not always, Earl. There are times that Court has disgraced itself. That should be simple enough for even you to understand. Let me know if you draw a blank and I'll fill you in right here.
 
CFM said:
In the past, inauguration day was March 4. Do you know why it was moved to January 20? A hint is it's the same reason why votes can be counted on election day not two weeks later.
Click to expand...

There was a lengthy period to allow for the tabulation of votes and for the incoming president to select his cabinet. It was moved to January because modern technology no longer made it necessary to wait so long.
 
martin said:
Not always, Earl. There are times that Court has disgraced itself. That should be simple enough for even you to understand. Let me know if you draw a blank and I'll fill you in right here.
Click to expand...

I never draw a blank, Marty...you?

Disgrace isn’t relevant, Marty.

Decisions by the Supreme Court are final...unless a later Supreme Court decides differently, which is not disgraceful, just a different decision by a different Court.

You may see this with Roe vs. Wade and restrictions by Democrats concerning the Second Amendment which has no restrictions.

It’s 6-3 now, Marty.
 
Hello Walt,

Walt said:
Kavanaugh asked a question in a recent decision, why should we let votes overturn an election? The answer is because elections are decided by votes, not what Kavanaugh wants the results to be.

In particular, Kavanaugh complained that votes counted after midnight might change the results. No where did he come up with any proof that votes counted after midnight were worse than votes counted before midnight. Just that he wanted the right to cut short the count, if trump is winning. But what if trump is losing, then he wanted the votes to count.
Click to expand...

Kav is a drunken womanizer.

I no longer respect the court.

The SCOTUS has become a political football, thanks to Republicans.
 
Michael_Panetta said:
There was a lengthy period to allow for the tabulation of votes and for the incoming president to select his cabinet. It was moved to January because modern technology no longer made it necessary to wait so long.
Click to expand...

That same modern technology allows votes to be counted much quicker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top