Jump to content

the trump election lawsuit thread of dominance

henrygandorf

By henrygandorf
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

troph

troph 24798

Posted
Posted
Yep.  It's strange that they have "boards" of canvassers at all.  But all of the boards are four people, two from each party.  There's no language about voting on any issue, much less certification.  It's basically gather the info, tot up the votes, and certify.  No voting on anything, no discretion, nothing.

It’s not that strange to me - someone has to sign off on the math. Each county added together = total votes. It’s generally good to have that outside the hands of one elected official. This shouldn’t be an issue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Bookman
Bookman

The rumor is that Alito and Thomas voted first, and then there was a dump of 7 votes. Texas expert says there’s only a 0.0039% chance of this happening.

Bama Chick
Bama Chick

Fuck Kayleigh and her headache and all the other enabling babysitters. I hope she hasn’t had a night with more than three hours of sleep for this entire year. I hope he texts her and calls her at al

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

40 plus indictments, guilty pleas, convictions, prison sentences, and roughly a dozen fed cases borne of said investigation is slightly more than jack shit.

Posted Images

Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52498

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Upgrayedd said:

Lulz there's a call script . . . 

CALL SCRIPT:
Receptionist: Hello. Thank you for calling our office.
You: Hello my name is ____. Today I’m calling to urge [REPRESENTATIVE

NAME] to support a transparent audit of votes in our state to protect all legal votes. There have been proven irregularities nationwide, including with electronic voting systems.

Receptionist: Great. We will make a note of this for the Representative. Is there anything else I can help you with?

You: No, thank you. I’m only calling to ask [REPRESENTATIVE NAME] to support electoral transparency and integrity, with an urgent audit of both ballots AND electronic voting systems.

 

And those proven irregularities are?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Hmmm there’s a good chance one of that board is related to my wife. 

Your wife is a Dombroski-Gebhardt from Williamsport, PA? 

Mine too!

We used to spend our summers at...

EAGLE RIVER! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cousin Strawberry

Cousin Strawberry 1261

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Mole said:

So here’s one bit out of many that I struggle with. Let’s say I think the Trump claim is true. It would be the most destructive scandal in American history. It would be destructive in a fundamentally different way. It would be terrible for everyone and hurt everyone. 
 

On the Texas Ags threads as well as the crazies in my own circle, they don’t just think it happened, they’re rooting for it to have happened. I don’t get rooting for such a terrible and destructive event, even if I believed it to be true. I’d rather to have simply just lost. 
 

The desire to be right is a terrible thing.

This.  Just like the Qtards.  Deep down, they hope that millions of children in the US are being sexually assaulted and eaten by democrats every year.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105139

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Beau Vine said:

image.png.2f916cee61762e10717e055bc495ce50.png

Wait....so the #1 item, the thing that Trump has shouted for the most and continues to do (opposes counting any later-received mailed ballots) is fraud?  Huh.  Interesting.

#2 - Mail-in ballots are fraudulent?  Just, across the board?  Interesting.

#3 - no witnesses allowed?  Interesting, being that every time the Trump campaign has complained about that, they have had to then admit "well, okay, poll watchers WERE allowed."'

#4 -- WTF does that even mean?  If nobody shows up and votes, well, clearly, no fraud.  But if people are enthusiastic and turnout, and "too many" of them vote against your guy, then FRAUD!

#5 -- yes, changing votes would definitely be fraud.  Thankfully, there is no evidence that this happened.

#6 -- imbalanced votes?  Like....more votes for one candidate than another?  WTF does this mean?

#7 -- dead people definitely should not vote.  And if any such ballots are found, remove them.  Don't think there's any big lobby against this....nor is there any evidence that this occurred in any material amount.

#8 -- "ballot mishandling" -- again, WTF does that even mean?

#9 -- "statistical analysis" -- also....WTF?  Statistical analysis doesn't actually change a vote or a vote count.

#10 -- yeah, chuckle-worthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85337

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Wait....so the #1 item, the thing that Trump has shouted for the most and continues to do (opposes counting any later-received mailed ballots) is fraud?  Huh.  Interesting.

#2 - Mail-in ballots are fraudulent?  Just, across the board?  Interesting.

#3 - no witnesses allowed?  Interesting, being that every time the Trump campaign has complained about that, they have had to then admit "well, okay, poll watchers WERE allowed."'

#4 -- WTF does that even mean?  If nobody shows up and votes, well, clearly, no fraud.  But if people are enthusiastic and turnout, and "too many" of them vote against your guy, then FRAUD!

#5 -- yes, changing votes would definitely be fraud.  Thankfully, there is no evidence that this happened.

#6 -- imbalanced votes?  Like....more votes for one candidate than another?  WTF does this mean?

#7 -- dead people definitely should not vote.  And if any such ballots are found, remove them.  Don't think there's any big lobby against this....nor is there any evidence that this occurred in any material amount.

#8 -- "ballot mishandling" -- again, WTF does that even mean?

#9 -- "statistical analysis" -- also....WTF?  Statistical analysis doesn't actually change a vote or a vote count.

#10 -- yeah, chuckle-worthy.

Sorry, let's try this again:

#1 - stopping the count of ILLEGAL votes

#2 - Trump says mail-in ballots are fraud, they are fraud.  Except for when members of his administration do it - not fraud. Or when he sent mailers in NC, FL and AZ to vote by mail - also not fraud.  The rest - the fraudiest fraud that ever frauded

#3 - not enough GOP witnesses and/or weren't allowed to sit in the lap of the counters 

#4 - would this preclude using Minnesota voter data to say Michigan had too many voters?

#5 - 

#6 - those rural counties that vote 80/20 Trump? totally okay.  Those urban precincts that vote 80/20 Democrat? FRAUD!

#7 - what about a trump voter requesting a ballot for his dead mom so he can vote for Trump twice?

#8 - did a Democrat touch the ballot? MISHANDLED!

#9 - I cannot believe they are using "statistical analysis" to prove fraud (or not fraud, per their filings) in court.

#10 - Media Fraud - like OAN declaring Trump won or Newsmax showing fake electoral maps. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105139

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Cousin Strawberry said:

100% written by a non-native English speaker.

Also correct.  It makes you wonder....if your side/argument is clearly aligned with foreign bad actors/troublemakers, MAYBE you're not working in our country's best interests?

I gotta tell you, if I was advancing an argument/position with respect to US politics, and I saw Al Qaeada training camps reading my missives and cheering my position.....I would re-think the fuck outta my position.

Our enemies are enthusiastic about the right's assualt on our democratic norms and the idea of having free and fair elections.  Their Parler sycophants are doing our enemies' dirty work.  They should stop doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31471

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, troph said:


It’s not that strange to me - someone has to sign off on the math. Each county added together = total votes. It’s generally good to have that outside the hands of one elected official. This shouldn’t be an issue.

I mean I generally agree, but to have an even number of multiple persons on the board for a mandatory, ministerial function, with no mechanism for resolution of a tie is kind of dumb.  The statutes don't even contemplate a vote among the canvassers, except to adjourn on statutory grounds.

If it's a mandatory, ministerial function, there's no harm in having one person do it.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RDCanecutter

RDCanecutter 26443

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Cousin Strawberry said:

Yeah, the hunting portion of the board is chock full of posts from adults with kids who are talking about "saving up for a new Polaris."  It's crazy.

I dunno. From a kid's point of view, "Family staying poor because we bought lots of hunting shit on credit" is still way more appealing than "Family staying poor because dad bounced a bunch of checks to finance 2nd life with biker chick from the truck stop at least I think that's what he's doing because he disappeared."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105139

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

I dunno. From a kid's point of view, "Family staying poor because we bought lots of hunting shit on credit" is still way more appealing than "Family staying poor because dad bounced a bunch of checks to finance 2nd life with biker chick from the truck stop at least I think that's what he's doing because he disappeared."

Ah, the soft bigotry of low expectations.  Trumpkins are kinda making that normalized these days, amirite?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5076

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I mean I generally agree, but to have an even number of multiple persons on the board for a mandatory, ministerial function, with no mechanism for resolution of a tie is kind of dumb.  The statutes don't even contemplate a vote among the canvassers, except to adjourn on statutory grounds.

If it's a mandatory, ministerial function, there's no harm in having one person do it.

In the election process, I think there a several, straight forward, clerical tasks that require balanced parties to do it.  In Nebraska, on election day, you have someone from one party check the name in the voter roll book, and then someone from the other party write in the name in the second book.  If an R gives the voter the ballot, the D collects it and puts it in the box.  Every task has an R and D executing it.  There is no real decision making.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31471

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

 

What this does point out is that it's stupid to try to turn a Notice of Appeal into some sort of advocacy document, as they did.  It is mostly a formality, but you can fuck it up.

Also kind of stupid to try to expedite the appeal as to only one issue, as opposed to all of them.  The Court of Appeals is going to love that.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31471

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Tuco said:

In the election process, I think there a several, straight forward, clerical tasks that require balanced parties to do it.  In Nebraska, on election day, you have someone from one party check the name in the voter roll book, and then someone from the other party write in the name in the second book.  If an R gives the voter the ballot, the D collects it and puts it in the box.  Every task has an R and D executing it.  There is no real decision making.  

That is a fine idea.  And maybe that's buried somewhere in the legislative history of the Michigan election code, but it certainly isn't explicit.  Maybe the reason for a four-person, bipartisan board of canvassers is to provide the ability to divide labor, but it should have been more explicitly set out.

Also, all this looking at other states' codes and statutes makes me kind of swell with pride at the general readability, organization, and coherency of most of Texas' statutes.  We have some dumbassery, too, like no reconciliation between the governor's authority and local officials authority in the emergency declaration statute, but by and large ours are pretty, pretty good.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5076

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

He said he was an engineer. You know he's tired of that schmoozing and small-talk shit since WAY back.

Interesting.  As an engineer, I am fairly comfortable telling a client that they can't do something they want to do.  Looking back at his statements, it pretty much follows that script.  "Yeah, I wish we could do that, too, but the code won't allow it (and I want to keep my license.)" 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13512

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Js1 said:

God, this is so fucking stupid

 

Trump won Luzerne County, PA by 14 points and 22k votes.

Your guy won your fucking county and you vote against certification. 

The goal now is obstruction even if it looks like you're taking votes away from Trump. Obstruct and then hope that a judge will somehow use your action (inaction?) to take away all votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dingleberryswitzer

dingleberryswitzer 2724

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

How am I supposed to tell my children that their vote only counts if they can make it onto a board of elections or get elected to state senate?

but the only way to get elected to state senate is to be on the state senate to vote on state senate results. 

They coooould just make a shitload of money and bribe a senator.  I think that might be the easy way.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mole

Mole 4333

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Tuco said:

Interesting.  As an engineer, I am fairly comfortable telling a client that they can't do something they want to do.  Looking back at his statements, it pretty much follows that script.  "Yeah, I wish we could do that, too, but the code won't allow it (and I want to keep my license.)" 

How do you know someone is an engineer without asking them? Don’t worry, they’ll tell you.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Native Horn

Native Horn 3504

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

If Trump were really all that great, he wouldn't need lawyers. He'd just strip naked, clamber up the Washington Monument, and strike a pose. The entire country would cheer.

But he can't even try to do that. Loser.

Spread some Crisco on that bad boy from about 530' up and you could sell tickets.

  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jack Straw

Jack Straw 2954

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Js1 said:

This is like Tom Herman going on TV and calling another team's coaching subpar and saying a team is poorly disciplined. 

It’s like Johnny Sack calling you out for being racist, or Slorch calling you out for being disingenuous.  You’ve hit the bottom, stop digging.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...