If you have any doubt Beer Ball Brett is Trump’s man, Wisconsin case proves it:

[ThatOwlWoman]

And again. True. Pretending that folks will not question the veracity of "found" votes and votes received after the deadline suddenly changing results is just that... Pretense. It's an absurdity to believe that nobody will question that.

At some point an election ends and you do not get to keep "finding" votes, even if you really hate the person who won. (And yes, this works both ways).

Sucks to be a military person serving overseas then, doesn't it?

[Concart]

Seriously? Votes received after election day results are reported can easily be an attempt to overturn actual election results, suddenly "finding" ballots in the trunks of cars, in basements, in the back seat of the neighbors creepy van...

Elections do not last forever, and you don't get to keep voting after results have been determined just because you didn't like the result and want new "votes" to overturn the result.

You reveal everything by putting the word vote in quotation marks. It's an implication that the vote is not legitimate. What are you afraid of? Seems no one wants to answer this question:

If a vote is legitimately cast (ballot completed, vote mailed and postmarked) before election day, what is the rationale for not counting that vote. The ONLY rationale is suppression. Period.

[ThatOwlWoman]

You reveal everything by putting the word vote in quotation marks. It's an implication that the vote is not legitimate. What are you afraid of? Seems no one wants to answer this question:

If a vote is legitimately cast (ballot completed, vote mailed and postmarked) before election day, what is the rationale for not counting that vote. The ONLY rationale is suppression. Period.

Of course. It's no coincidence that #TRE45ON did everything possible to fuck up the USPS ahead of the election, is it?

[gfm7175]

”In Wisconsin decision, Supreme Court foreshadows election night cliffhanger”

“Those States want to avoid the chaos and suspicions of impropriety that can ensue if thousands of absentee ballots flow in after election day and potentially flip the results of an election,” Kavanaughwrote in a concurring opinion released Monday night. “And those States also want to be able to definitively announce the results of the election on election night, or as soon as possible thereafter.”

“Justice Elena Kagan used her dissenting opinion in the Wisconsin case”

“Justice Kavanaugh alleges that ‘suspicions of impropriety’ will result if ‘absentee ballots flow in after election day and potentially flip the results of an election,’” Kagan wrote, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.“

“But there are no results to ‘flip’ until all valid votes are counted. And nothing could be more ‘suspicio[us]’ or ‘improp[er]’ than refusing to tally votes once the clock strikes 12 on election night. To suggest otherwise, especially in these fractious times, is to disserve the electoral process.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/1...fhanger-432725

Now who is the one politician out there raising fears regarding mail in voting and wants the election called election night? And here we have Beer Ball mirroring those beliefs, makes you wonder if Beer Ball also took that secret twilight Uber to the White House that has become so popular with conservatives

Got to love Kagan’s reply, how can you flip an election that hasn’t been decided till all the votes are counted?

By counting the results on election night, figuring out how many fraudulent ballots you need in order to flip it, and then manufacturing those fraudulent ballots and counting them afterwards...

"We lost on election night by 20K votes... OH, BUT WAIT!!!! We "found" 40K ballots afterwards, so actually, we WIN by 20K votes!! Yippee!!!"

There is a reason why the first Tuesday in November is called Election DAY... It means that all voting is done on that DAY.... Anything received after that DAY is NOT allowed... Plan ahead, morons...

[Damocles]

You reveal everything by putting the word vote in quotation marks. It's an implication that the vote is not legitimate. What are you afraid of? Seems no one wants to answer this question:

If a vote is legitimately cast (ballot completed, vote mailed and postmarked) before election day, what is the rationale for not counting that vote. The ONLY rationale is suppression. Period.

I am "afraid" of your compatriots manufacturing votes to "find" on Funk & Wagnell's porch, or the backseat of the neighbor's creepy van, or a "poll workers" trunk... I believe that every person who watches a "recount" where "new ballots" are "found" suddenly in cars or basements has a reasonable base reaction that believes that ballots unattached to verification information "found" in the backseat of your car just might be manufactured in an attempt to overturn an election. And it isn't the "ONLY" rationale, that's absurd.

[RB 60]

Like I said, if you're too stupid to have properly filled out your ballot and mailed it by now, drop it off in person
or go to the polls and vote on Tuesday. Anything received after 8:00 PM Nov. 3 should not be counted. Period.

[ExpressLane]

Kagen, in her dissent said.....

however, this ignores the fact that votes cast AFTER the election is over are not valid votes......the Wisconsin case overturned a lower court's decision that the state should count votes REGARDLESS OF WHEN THEY WERE POSTMARKED........

think about that for a minute.......is a vote that is cast after an election is over a valid vote?.....

Yep

[Concart]

I am "afraid" of your compatriots manufacturing votes to "find" on Funk & Wagnell's porch, or the backseat of the neighbor's creepy van, or a "poll workers" trunk... I believe that every person who watches a "recount" where "new ballots" are "found" suddenly in cars or basements has a reasonable base reaction that believes that ballots unattached to verification information "found" in the backseat of your car just might be manufactured in an attempt to overturn an election. And it isn't the "ONLY" rationale, that's absurd.

Your fear is based on no evidence. I can't help you there. You still aren't answering the question. If a vote is legitimately cast as I described, what is your rationale for not counting it? Do you believe that post office delays should deny that person the right to have their vote counted? Apparently you're fine with that. I'm curious as to why.

[Nordberg]

The postmark was always the winning factor in the past. It means you followed the rules. If it came late, it of course was not counted on election day, but part of a recount.

[archives]

and yet, the decision the court overturned was the one that said votes had be accepted REGARDLESS of the postmark.......sort of fucks up your entire argument, doesn't it........

“pp” is wrong again, all in the same thread, the case does not say that, nor even mentions it, want to try for a strike out

[archives]

Yep

“pp” was wrong, Wisconsin wanted to accept ballots up to six days after the election if the ballot was postmarked on or before Election Day, Beer Ball said no, any ballot regardless of when it was mailed that didn’t get there by Election Day was discounted

[Damocles]

Your fear is based on no evidence. I can't help you there. You still aren't answering the question. If a vote is legitimately cast as I described, what is your rationale for not counting it? Do you believe that post office delays should deny that person the right to have their vote counted? Apparently you're fine with that. I'm curious as to why.

My "fear" is based on reality. Folks do not trust "poll workers" who "find" ballots after the election is over to be telling the truth. When it is illegal to collect the "evidence" you must rely on logic and reality.

[Damocles]

“pp” was wrong, Wisconsin wanted to accept ballots up to six days after the election if the ballot was postmarked on or before Election Day, Beer Ball said no, any ballot regardless of when it was mailed that didn’t get there by Election Day was discounted

My guess is that is because that is what the law they passed in Wisconsin said. So, basically they didn't want the judiciary to change the law by fiat.

[Concart]

My "fear" is based on reality. Folks do not trust "poll workers" who "find" ballots after the election is over to be telling the truth. When it is illegal to collect the "evidence" you must rely on logic and reality.

No your fear is based on nothing. There is no evidence. You all long with the rest have bought a made up story.

[Damocles]

No your fear is based on nothing. There is no evidence. You all long with the rest have bought a made up story.

You are wrong. My "fear" is based on reality.