I was wondering when one of you would decide to step away from the disagreement. .
1 Like
Without evidence that a particular procedure in the voting process de facto harms or was intended to harm a protected class of voters, it is up to the state legislatures, not the courts, to deal with the voting rules.
Now that humans control most of the planet, it’s clear that extractivism has its limits if we are to coexist with other species. The latest More Than Human (MOTH) law protects whales.
1 Like
TPM shout out in Guardian today. That’s what we’re getting for our subscription, people.
5 Likes
The state could just remove the date from the envelope.
It’s only “odd” if you assume judges appointed by Democrats disregard the law to reach results predetermined by ideology and politics and that their preferred method of statutory or constitutional interpretation is merely a bad faith pretext for reverse engineering reasoning to hide results-oriented decisions the way Federalist-selected judges do.
2 Likes
Your tax return isn’t rejected if you don’t place a correct date on the outer envelope used to convey it to its destination.
Because more Democratic voters vote by mail.
In Virginia, the vote for Lyndon LaRouche’s ghost would be recorded with the hand-counted write-in votes. It wouldn’t affect the election outcome unless millions of others had written in the same candidate, but there would be a record of it. I recorded a number of votes for Mickey Mouse and the like in my day.
5 Likes
True.
This is just another example of the Second Law Republican behavior: if you can’t win fairly, cheat.
The first Law of Republican behavior is, “If the truth just won’t do, cheat.”
If Virginia wants to accept a write-in vote without requiring the voter to check the “Write-In Vote” box, that’s Virginia’s business. Just as it’s Texas’s business if we want to require the voter to check that box before their red-crayon screed gets counted.
(Actually, Texas requires the write-in candidate to have officially filed for their write-in candidacy, so a vote for the ghost of Lyndon LaRouche will under no circumstances be counted. No Mickey Mouse votes either. And I think our law is quite sensible on that matter.)
2 Likes
That seems close to if not a distinction without a difference.
If you throw someone out of a plane without a parachute, does that kill them on is them hitting the ground?
Are people wrong to think that they have voted when they deposit their ballot after having (forgive the word, I may be applying it erroneously) voted?
2 Likes
Sensible? Sounds more like a ‘Camel’s nose under the tent’ slippery slope argument to me.
In what Republicans are currently doing to suppress the vote (on and off the federal judiciary) we are witnessing just the latest is a long history of seeking to restrict American’s ability to vote. Here’s a clip from the Father of Modern American Conservatism, Paul Weyrich.
4 Likes
It’s a distinction with a big difference. Any eligible voter can (1) register to vote, (2) get a ballot from the pollworkers, and then (3) fuck it all up by spoiling their ballot. The VRA protects items (1) and (2) from being held against the voter if they immaterially screw up the process, but it does not protect item (3) if the voter does not adhere to the rules for casting that ballot, regardless of whether they’re dumb or pointless, the VRA does not bail out their ballot.
You make good points and negate them with calls to violence.
I’d love to wake, grab the phone and read that trump choked on a piece of chicken, had a stroke and has been reduced to a phantom of his former self.
1 Like
Still waiting. Chicken’s cold in the fridge at Mar-a-Lago…
Scott Yenor thinks he’s already living in the Republic of Gilead.
It was bad enough when Boise State University political science professor Scott Yenor now famously said “some women” are “more medicated, meddlesome and quarrelsome than women need to be.”
It was bad enough that he said universities shouldn’t make efforts to recruit more women to science fields — or medical fields or legal fields, or any fields really — but rather society should “inspire young women to be secure with feminine goals of homemaking and having children.”
3 Likes
And the Republican majority on SCOTUS is always happy to facilitate that effort.
Post hoc: Oh, I see I misread the article. This was not a SCOTUS decision, this was a federal appeals court. Still terrible.