Republicans Won’t Commit to Accepting Election Results

LurchAddams said:
Sure. All anti-voting bills and anti-lgbt legislation is passed by Republicans. Pence tried to do it has governor before he was tapped for VP and had to reverse the law that employers could legally fire you for being gay. All "bathroom bills", banning people from restrooms if they were born a different gender? Those are all GOP-sponsored bills.

The GOP is nothing but a racist party with power. Very dangerous.
Click to expand...

you're a lying and ignorant cretin.
 
domer76 said:
“Ballot drop boxes appear nowhere in the detailed statutory system for absentee voting. WEC’s authorization of ballot drop boxes was unlawful…”

.
Click to expand...

as stated in the US constitution, elections must be conducted in accordance with the detailed statutory system set up by the legislature.......thank you for finally admitting the WI election was unconstitutional.......
 
Too funny, while Trump was a result of republican policies for many years now, he sure has taken control of them. The republican base is fading but the core issues of immigration, abortion, and sexual diversity still has a hold on the minds of the uneducated and intolerant. The DOJ needs to indict Trump and get it over with.


Trump's America

https://www.dropbox.com/s/497mckyoef7angt/Chapter 10 sgl.pdf?dl=0


Let's go Donald: https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/the-complete-listing-atrocities-1-1-056
 
 
 
AssHatZombie said:
state legislatures did not decide covid changes in all cases.

the constitution is clear on that.

and on the pennsylvania, a court decided it was unconstitutional.

you lost. accept the results.
Click to expand...

It changed nothing. You are still fighting the 2020 election based on nothing but one court opinion out of 60+ cases. The PA court opinion did not change the electoral vote certification of PA.
 
AssHatZombie said:
npr is a liberal rag, not to be trusted.
Click to expand...

If NPR is not acceptable let's look at the actual court case:

J-18A-E-2022mo.pdf (pacourts.us)

The unconstitutional opinion you refer to was a lower state court. The link above is to the PA Supreme Court opinion which overturned that opinion.

G. ConclusionSection 13 of Act 77 is not a bar to our consideration of the universal mail-in voting provisions of the Act. The Commonwealth Court’s declaration that the universal mail-in voting provisions of Act 77 were unconstitutional was premised on its conclusion that it was bound by the definition of “offer to vote” in Article VII, Section 1 of our Constitution as construed in the Chase and Lancaster City decisions. For the reasons we have explained, the pronouncements in those cases do not control our interpretation of the Constitution in effect when Act 77 became law. Based upon our analysis of Article VII, Section 1 of our Constitution, we conclude that the phrase “offer to vote” does not establish in-person voting as an elector qualification or otherwise mandate in-person voting. We reiterate that our General Assembly is endowed with great legislative power,
 
AssHatZombie said:
no they didn't.
Click to expand...

Pennsylvania's mail-in voting law has been upheld by the state's Supreme Court, allowing all voters in the key swing state to cast ballots by mail in November and for other future elections.
In a 5-2 decision released Tuesday, the Democratic-majority court overturned a lower court's ruling from January that found Pennsylvania's Act 77 to be in violation of the state's constitution.
"We find no restriction in our Constitution on the General Assembly's ability to create universal mail-in voting," Justice Christine Donohue wrote in the majority opinion.
 
Flash said:
Pennsylvania's mail-in voting law has been upheld by the state's Supreme Court, allowing all voters in the key swing state to cast ballots by mail in November and for other future elections.
In a 5-2 decision released Tuesday, the Democratic-majority court overturned a lower court's ruling from January that found Pennsylvania's Act 77 to be in violation of the state's constitution.
"We find no restriction in our Constitution on the General Assembly's ability to create universal mail-in voting," Justice Christine Donohue wrote in the majority opinion.
Click to expand...

Pretty easy to look up, huh? Those who wish to live in denial just can’t face the truth - a valid, non-fraudulent, constitutional election.
 
domer76 said:
Pretty easy to look up, huh? Those who wish to live in denial just can’t face the truth - a valid, non-fraudulent, constitutional election.
Click to expand...

They still think they are going to win the election. One lower state court rules in their favor and they think that means something. They still have no evidence of any fraud--I have been waiting for a single example of a county with more votes than registered voters; so far, nothing despite that being one of their claims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top