Originally published at: Election Denier Tries To Make It Easier For Candidates To Challenge Voting Rules
Rep. Mike Bost (R-IL), who voted in 2020 to overturn the presidential election results, leads a case the Supreme Court heard Wednesday in which he and a couple of Republican electors challenge Illinois’ ballot-counting grace period. The arguments centered on whether Bost had standing to bring the lawsuit, which challenges Illinois’ policy of counting ballots…
I have to wonder about these folks who want to challenge voting rules and regulations. There were valid reasons why some of these state elections laws were put in place. Usually because of some unforeseen circumstance, weather probably being the main factor. But mailing one’s ballot may be fighting for the top spot.
5 Likes
“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” – Lord Acton
1 Like
From what’s presented in the article, I can’t imagine why the League of Women Voters(!) and the American Civil Liberties Union(!) have come out opposing counting all the mailed-in ballots postmarked prior to Election Day. Surely they are aware of how frequent delays in mail delivery take place, and how you can’t predict when something will actually be delivered?? Particularly since Postmaster Dejoy de-joyed the entire system, to make sure those ballots wouldn’t come in on time?
Whining on how he’d have a bigger margin of victory if they only counted ballots from election day/early in-person voting is undemocratic. It’s Republican. And lately, that means unAmerican.
3 Likes
I thought it was “the love of power.” Or was that “money”?
It seems like such an obvious way to game an election.
“Your ballot may be postmarked Oct 20, but due to a routing error through Fairbanks, it only arrived Nov 10 and can’t be counted.”
2 Likes
This is idiotic. Paying your taxes depends on the postmarked date, not the due date. So does renewing your driver’s license and any number of other government-related issues. The only situations in which the postmarked date doesn’t count are related to private commercial transactions - paying a bill or your mortgage, for instance. There is no rational reason for making vote-by-mail an exception top the general governmental rule.
4 Likes
On a good day, Mike Bost is 5’5”. He’s best known for his whiny stompy baby fits where he slams his toddler fists on tables, demanding powder on his bottom. Glad to see you call him an election denier. He’s absolutely that, and more. In addition to supporting a draft dodger with 34 felony convictions, Bost is also a super tough guy who chest thumps Nazis cosplaying as patriots. Suck a d*ck Mike.
1 Like
If you can’t win a free and fair election, cheat.
And these motherfuckers whine when we call them unAmerican and fascists. If the armband fits assholes….
They are not opposing the counting of the ballots. They are for the loosening of standards of who can oppose and why.
1 Like
Under the state’s rule, all votes have to be postmarked before polls close. Therefore at the moment polls close, there are a finite number of votes. Someone has won or lost. Why does it matter whether they count that number for 3 days or 12 days? Nothing this guy can do will change how many votes are out there. There does have to be a time to say “done counting” even if a ballot has got stuck into a mailbox by a piece of juicy fruit. But how does the choice affect anything? Is he arguing that the margin of winning is so important that he ruins his manicure and has to get a new one? Do voters whose ballots take a long time to arrive after being postmarked —mostly those overseas, but given the state of USPS it could just be a rural state or two away.
On the other hand, voters who are disabled or away will be injured if they DO get votes postmarked by Election Day but not counted. Their vote won’t count even though cast timely. And why should they have to gauge how long it might take to get from Botswana to their state and this be forced to vote early?
The question isn’t whether people with an interest in elections can or cannot sue to get a ruling on changes in election rules. The question is whether this particular situation—the timing of counting votes cast—causes an actual or even speculative injury to the most deeply interested person—the candidate.
Is the argument that he has to hire people to watch to be sure the vote counters themselves don’t miscount. Isn’t that what recounts are for? If his own voters are so freaked out that something might make his margin of winning a shade less, so he wins but not as much as he wants to brag, hasn’t anyone heard of volunteers?