ANOTHER Judge Rules Democrats violated election law.

[Waddy]

You believe without evidence. That shows faith, or ignorance. President Biden, when elected said he would work with anyone ready to advance the country. Working with people that don't have that interest is a waste of time. Your belief in the big lie is a waste of my time. Bye.

The big lie is that we even know if elections are honest. We don't. Until we institute some form of identification for voters we won't be able to make that judgement. In this modern age, it's ignorant to ignore these concerns. You can't even do online banking without ID and security. We could easily apply those principles to elections. To deny these problems is a waste of my time. Bye.

 

[code1211]

of course, that too is a canard, we don't require a photo ID nor a driver's license (as some simply don't have such), proof of residency, a birth certificate, a passport, Canadian citizenship. we also do NOT close voting stations, have one at practically every corner, have mail in voting, have a 24hr hotline during elections to answer questions, no candidate that lost ever called rigged election, no hillbillies ever stormed our Capital, and we don't have a bunch of whiny losers moaning and groaning for months afterwards about rigged elections.
I actually feel sorry for those south of the border, imagine the supposedly "most powerful" nation on Earth looking like a 3rd world banana republic that the whole world is laughing at because there are such a large number of whiny losers and conspiracy theories who just can't accept
View attachment 67325991

Don't have roving mobs engaged in looting, arson, assault and murder for months on end, as I recall, either.

Maybe that simply was not covered here in the lower 48.

Your affinity to remove the freedom of speech from US Citizens viewed from your perch in the Great White North is odd, but you are free to hold whatever opinion you hold that makes you feel better.

 

[code1211]

Because they recount the votes. They also audit procedures, compare ballots out and more.

Do they actually audit ballots? I thought that in a recount, they simply re-counted ballots already counted. ERGO, the name.

What were/are the audit points that they employ to AUDIT ballots already approved to have been legal?

At the time of a recount, there are no audit trails remaining. The ballots are ALREADY removed from any sleeves that had signatures that weren't reviewed and any identity information at all.

WAHT IS THERE TO AUDIT?

 

[code1211]

And if you verify that all the ballots were cast by eligible voters, how can you be sure they weren't all pod people taken over by aliens from outer space?

We need blood samples from all voters, like in The Thing. And all voters should cast their votes in the nude so we'll know they're the gender they claim. And they must recite the constitution as they fill out their ballots, without pause or error.

Let's see, any other nonsense I can come up with?

You advocate massive changes to address unfounded concerns based entirely on the Big Lie the major players have all acknowledged they told you.

I say we make every ballot the same as a Bitcoin with solid Biometrics security to cast. Perfect verification. Perfect chain of custody. Easy as a short trip to an app.

We don't need to carry them carved on stone slabs uphill both ways in the snow in democrat leaning districts, while lattes are served in the moments it takes to vote in republican leaning ones.

Voting does not occur in a virtual setting. Real life people fill in the choices on hard copies. Your Bitcoin reference seems oddly out of place in this consideration. Also seems like you're referencing some sort of poll tax.

Blood samples are not required. Just proof of identity. I'm sure you are capable of even more extreme forms and levels of nonsense than those displayed in your post.

If a person cannot vote in person on "Election Day" and must submit a mail-in ballot, there is nothing prohibiting a notary from notarizing that signature.

THAT would be a similar level of identity verification to the one performed for in-person voting. Applying the Notary stamp to the sealed envelope and then immediately dropping the envelope into a secured submission box seems good.

 

[What if...?]

Voting does not occur in a virtual setting. Real life people fill in the choices on hard copies. Your Bitcoin reference seems oddly out of place in this consideration. Also seems like you're referencing some sort of poll tax.

Blood samples are not required. Just proof of identity. I'm sure you are capable of even more extreme forms and levels of nonsense than those displayed in your post.

If a person cannot vote in person on "Election Day" and must submit a mail-in ballot, there is nothing prohibiting a notary from notarizing that signature.

THAT would be a similar level of identity verification to the one performed for in-person voting. Applying the Notary stamp to the sealed envelope and then immediately dropping the envelope into a secured submission box seems good.

WAY to 17th century.

You just want it as difficult as possible to vote. Want to create situations where it can become physically impossible to cast a vote because there wasn't enough time in that day to get everybody through

Hell, I bet you would he cool.with finding out when democrats cannot make it to the polls and make that day each persons voting day.

You don't care about election integrity at all.

You only care about your side winning.

Your dying, irrelevant side.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Don't have roving mobs engaged in looting, arson, assault and murder for months on end, as I recall, either.

Maybe that simply was not covered here in the lower 48.

Your affinity to remove the freedom of speech from US Citizens viewed from your perch in the Great White North is odd, but you are free to hold whatever opinion you hold that makes you feel better.

Glad you are extended the "freedom of speech" to me while accusing me of withholding it from you. Gawd, what an immature argument. Someone disagrees with you and your entire philosophy and you accuse them of stifling your speech? They have mods here for that, you can say whatever you want, unlike you, I don't get defensive and feel picked on because someone has a different point of view.
btw, enjoy your Easter weekend and CHILL!

 

[code1211]

WAY to 17th century.

You just want it as difficult as possible to vote. Want to create situations where it can become physically impossible to cast a vote because there wasn't enough time in that day to get everybody through

Hell, I bet you would he cool.with finding out when democrats cannot make it to the polls and make that day each persons voting day.

You don't care about election integrity at all.

You only care about your side winning.

Your dying, irrelevant side.

Calm down. Take a breath. Your imagination is running wild and carrying you away to destinations that exist only in your oddly warped, imaginary world.

EVERYTHING you post is response to my post is completely unconnected with what I post.

Why did you bother to quote my post?

 

[j brown's body]

This is the problem with reading right-wing rags like the Examiner. It claims that the judge ruled that election law was violated and gives a link to the article. Yet the article states quite clearly:

"The judge didn't rule on whether Benson's directive violated state election law, but did say the directive violated the Administrative Procedures Act, the process that must be followed when an agency creates new rules."

 

[code1211]

Glad you are extended the "freedom of speech" to me while accusing me of withholding it from you. Gawd, what an immature argument. Someone disagrees with you and your entire philosophy and you accuse them of stifling your speech? They have mods here for that, you can say whatever you want, unlike you, I don't get defensive and feel picked on because someone has a different point of view.
btw, enjoy your Easter weekend and CHILL!

I didn't say you removed or tried to remove anything. Only that you seem to approve of it.

Happy Easter to you as well!

 

[What if...?]

Calm down. Take a breath. Your imagination is running wild and carrying you away to destinations that exist only in your oddly warped, imaginary world.

EVERYTHING you post is response to my post is completely unconnected with what I post.

Why did you bother to quote my post?

Mockery.

 

[mrjurrs]

Do they actually audit ballots? I thought that in a recount, they simply re-counted ballots already counted. ERGO, the name.

What were/are the audit points that they employ to AUDIT ballots already approved to have been legal?

At the time of a recount, there are no audit trails remaining. The ballots are ALREADY removed from any sleeves that had signatures that weren't reviewed and any identity information at all.

WAHT IS THERE TO AUDIT?

Why don't you go study the GA recount process and report back?

 

[code1211]

Mockery.

Useless, but if it entertains you, I suppose it's worthwhile to you.

 

[code1211]

Why don't you go study the GA recount process and report back?

I understand that they recounted the ballots that were counted the first time.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Calm down. Take a breath.

Yeah, take some of your own advice, Governor Atwater.

 

[What if...?]

Useless, but if it entertains you, I suppose it's worthwhile to you.

It's really all y'all are good for.

Your chosen reality is is sad and stupid.

Debating you folks just feels like picking on the slow kid at this point.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

It's really all y'all are good for.

Your chosen reality is is sad and stupid.

Debating you folks just feels like picking on the slow kid at this point.

THEY ARE SLOW KIDS, just sayin'

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

I understand that they recounted the ballots that were counted the first time.

 

[Carl Young]

The big lie is that we even know if elections are honest. We don't. Until we institute some form of identification for voters we won't be able to make that judgement. In this modern age, it's ignorant to ignore these concerns. You can't even do online banking without ID and security. We could easily apply those principles to elections. To deny these problems is a waste of my time. Bye.

Polls show 70% 0f Republicans think the election was dishonest and 14% of Democrats. That's a serious problem within the electorate.

And 75% of all Americans want voter TD.

Poll: 70 percent of Republicans don’t think the election was free and fair

The POLITICO/Morning Consult survey found trust in the election system plummeted among Republicans while rising among Democrats after the race was called on Saturday.

www.politico.com

 

[Carl Young]

Do they actually audit ballots? I thought that in a recount, they simply re-counted ballots already counted. ERGO, the name.

What were/are the audit points that they employ to AUDIT ballots already approved to have been legal?

At the time of a recount, there are no audit trails remaining. The ballots are ALREADY removed from any sleeves that had signatures that weren't reviewed and any identity information at all.

WAHT IS THERE TO AUDIT?

Ask them https://www.theepochtimes.com/arizo...0-election_3758396.html?utm_source=pushengage

 

[What if...?]

Polls show 70% 0f Republicans think the election was dishonest and 14% of Democrats. That's a serious problem within the electorate.

And 75% of all Americans want voter TD.

Poll: 70 percent of Republicans don’t think the election was free and fair

The POLITICO/Morning Consult survey found trust in the election system plummeted among Republicans while rising among Democrats after the race was called on Saturday.

www.politico.com

100% of people who believe the election was dishonest get all their information from conservative media.

THAT is the serious problem with our electorate. Too many are easily brainwashed.

 

[Waddy]

Polls show 70% 0f Republicans think the election was dishonest and 14% of Democrats. That's a serious problem within the electorate.

And 75% of all Americans want voter TD.

Poll: 70 percent of Republicans don’t think the election was free and fair

The POLITICO/Morning Consult survey found trust in the election system plummeted among Republicans while rising among Democrats after the race was called on Saturday.

www.politico.com

Back in 2016 plenty of Democrats thought the election was dishonest, including the leadership. There is no way to know if elections are honest without a verifiable paper trail. That we don't have. So we just don't know.

 

[Carl Young]

Back in 2016 plenty of Democrats thought the election was dishonest, including the leadership. There is no way to know if elections are honest without a verifiable paper trail. That we don't have. So we just don't know.

In fact there has been no investigation to determine how much fraud there was and to what level.

Following Trump's Presidential win the Democrats tried to prove the election was fixed by having a lengthy investigation involving many hundreds of people and costing many millions of dollars and based on no evidence of any fraud whatsoever.. Yet now, despite serious public suspicions and uncertainties, no serious investigation is being held. This is not good for public confidence in election integrity,
and that counts for a great deal in any democracy.

 

[code1211]

Yeah, take some of your own advice, Governor Atwater.

Thanks! Your concern for me is touching.

 

[code1211]

It's really all y'all are good for.

Your chosen reality is is sad and stupid.

Debating you folks just feels like picking on the slow kid at this point.

Whatever.

 

[code1211]

View attachment 67326635

You really have a very limited view of anything.