A court declared a tie after an uncounted ballot was contested, and then she lost a drawing of names from a bowl.
Republicans, and whoever those judges were that decided that wasn’t a spoiled ballot are thugs. Does that ballot ruling have precedent now? Ugh.
then she lost a drawing of names from a bowl
Did anyone confirm that the name that was left in the bowl was actually Simonds’? Just a question…
And I thought the crap that went down in jebs territory to put his bro in the oval office was a real farce.
But this one here is beyond compare.
A new low of lows from the top down to the fish bowl. ah :vessel: sounds more important in gop lingo
True, and probably what they call women in private meetings. As in women are “baby vessels” shudder.
Simonds was at the drawing, as were her lawyers, so presumably they made sure it was fair. I would have had a random person from outside the room do the draw though, just to make sure the Republican doing the drawing didn’t mark the canisters so they picked the “right” one.
The ballot decision is BS though, there is no way that’s not a spoiled ballot…that’s how you get corrupt governments, stuff like that is just wrong and should never have been allowed. I understand why Simonds feels she has to let it go, and she’ll fight on (and you can bet that she starts now to get every single voter out that she can), but it’s too bad that kind of cheating is going to get through.