• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republican Attempts to Steal an Election in North Carolina (1 Viewer)

Parker_Chess

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 30, 2024
Messages
878
Reaction score
934
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The new Jim Crow. Just tossing out ballots that you don't like. All these laws in the book to challenge ballots need to be repealed. The idea that somebody can cast their vote on election day (presenting their proper identification) only then to have it challenged/tossed is completely proposterous.

"In North Carolina, the Republican candidate for a State Supreme Court seat has refused to concede to the Democratic incumbent, even though two recounts by a state elections board confirmed that he lost the November election by a few hundred votes.
...Judge Griffin wanted the ballots of roughly 65,000 people to be tossed; he argued that a majority of them were ineligible to vote because they did not supply certain required personal data — such as a driver’s license number — when they registered. But the omissions, he admitted, were because of administrative errors, and not the voters’ fault.

Voting rights experts have described the issues raised by Judge Griffin as moot because even if the voters’ registration forms were missing driver’s license numbers, they would have been required to show ID when they voted."

 
The new Jim Crow. Just tossing out ballots that you don't like. All these laws in the book to challenge ballots need to be repealed. The idea that somebody can cast their vote on election day (presenting their proper identification) only then to have it challenged/tossed is completely proposterous.

"In North Carolina, the Republican candidate for a State Supreme Court seat has refused to concede to the Democratic incumbent, even though two recounts by a state elections board confirmed that he lost the November election by a few hundred votes.
...Judge Griffin wanted the ballots of roughly 65,000 people to be tossed; he argued that a majority of them were ineligible to vote because they did not supply certain required personal data — such as a driver’s license number — when they registered. But the omissions, he admitted, were because of administrative errors, and not the voters’ fault.

Voting rights experts have described the issues raised by Judge Griffin as moot because even if the voters’ registration forms were missing driver’s license numbers, they would have been required to show ID when they voted."

This is what happens when people take note of what the president does and think they can ignore and flaunt the law also.
 
The idea that somebody can cast their vote on election day (presenting their proper identification) only then to have it
Here in NY we present no ID and have no issues.
And we don't have ballots thrown out even when Republicans win close elections.
 
The new Jim Crow. Just tossing out ballots that you don't like. All these laws in the book to challenge ballots need to be repealed. The idea that somebody can cast their vote on election day (presenting their proper identification) only then to have it challenged/tossed is completely proposterous.

"In North Carolina, the Republican candidate for a State Supreme Court seat has refused to concede to the Democratic incumbent, even though two recounts by a state elections board confirmed that he lost the November election by a few hundred votes.
...Judge Griffin wanted the ballots of roughly 65,000 people to be tossed; he argued that a majority of them were ineligible to vote because they did not supply certain required personal data — such as a driver’s license number — when they registered. But the omissions, he admitted, were because of administrative errors, and not the voters’ fault.

Voting rights experts have described the issues raised by Judge Griffin as moot because even if the voters’ registration forms were missing driver’s license numbers, they would have been required to show ID when they voted."

More of the same old crap from the left.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom