Paul. Lol.
1 Like
Again, you havn’t shows how this is only targeting locations where Democrats are. The way I read the law last year – the notice goes STATEWIDE to those who havn’t voted in x amount of elections. How is that targeting certain area’s? Spoiler alert – it isn’t.
I don’t know wha the heck you are talking about here.
I’ve said when it comes to ruling on the voter purging law – WI Supreme court should look only to see if the law violates the state or federal constitution and not re-write it (something courts can not do). If the judges vilate that standard – then they should be impeached by the legislture.
Last weeks supreme court rulling was correct in that the juscices were right in ruling they didn’t have the authority to tell the state to change the wording of the law. They had a choice to rule the law setting the date of the election unconstitutional, or allowing it to continue. Those are the ONLY choices the federal courts had.
It does appear that George Soros was mentioned in either of the articles you cited. I guess boogiemen are convenient to scare people.
Your distinction that “this only targets where Democrats are” is not an instance of targeting Democrats is very weak.
I’m still waiting for you to post the portion of the law that limits who they can send letters to that haven’t voted in x amount of elections. It’s state wide. It doesn’t target ANYONE other that those who might not be alive, or living in the state anymore. Why else would they NOT get a reply from over 200k people they sent letter to?
I’m STILL waiting for you to PROVE it’s targeted to only democrat strongholds and not applied equally to all voters who havn’t voted.
If you can’t do that, then it’s not targeted.
The proof that it targeted Democratic strongholds is that the people being required to re-register were overwhelmingly in districts that went to Clinton in 2016.
Instead of insisting that I provide this or that, why don’t you provide the basis for the Roberts’ court decision that the deadline for absentee ballots could not be extended was the the court should not make last minute changes in election laws IN NORMAL TIMES.
Tell us how these are normal times in your opinion.
Beside, my point in the OP was not to argue the issue of voter suppression but to point out that with all the efforts at suppression, the Democrats had won the race and this was an indicator of how things were likely to go in November. Instead of chewing over your sense of injustice at the voters of Wisconsin turning again voter suppression, why don’t you address the issue at hand, which is the weakening Republican position in a state that was crucial to Donald Trump’s 2016 Electoral College victory.
Or that would show that people moved or died in those area’s and havn’t been removed form the list previously. Again, you need to show that letters were ONLY sent to that area and not to all statewide. Waiting for the proof.
Show me anyplace in the constituion that gives a court authority to change a law. It doesn’t exist. They can either throw the law out, or let the law stand. That’s the ONLY two options a court has. They can’t just say – ignore the law and do this. It was the right decidsion. I disagree with the wording — it should have said the court can not change the law – only a legislature can do that.
These are not normal times, but that doesn’t give the court authority to change law. Only a legislative body can do that. The court can only rule the law is valid or invalid. Two choices.
“Karofsky benefited from nearly a half million dollars from George Soros, billionaire sugar daddy to far left causes and candidates, money pushed through the Democratic Party.”
Paul, read how that paragraph is carefully parsed.
A real journalist would have accompanied a statement like that with proof, which is easily accessed through public records.
1 Like
In a small sample size, scientists found evidence that people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) - a type of neurodegenerative condition associated with memory loss - are more likely to use more words than they need to, and take longer to find the right word than their healthy peers.
“Ronald Reagan started to have a decline in the number of unique words with repetitions of statements over time,” said Sherman.
“[He] started using more fillers, more empty phrases, like ‘thing’ or ‘something’ or things like ‘basically’ or ‘actually’ or ‘well’.”
1 Like
Read the decision. Even the conservatives on the Supreme Court disagree with you. The majority never questioned whether they could change the law (or in this case it was actually change an enforcement deadline). They stated that the law could not be changed this close to the election “in normal circumstances”
This is why you keep trying to shift the grounds of the debate, because the actual court judgment in question is a piece of blatant indefensible partisanship.
And if the money came from Soros how is that in any way different than Robert Mercer, Sheldon Adelson or the Koch family flooding money to conservative candidates.
I would be delighted to see less money spent on political campaigns, but if progressives use the ridiculous financing rules that conservatives have created what basis do you have for complaint.
The interesting to me is that almost no one is addressing the point of my OP – which is whether this is a bellwether for the fall election. You’re complaining about Soros, Snow is going on at length about how Wisconsin should be suppressing Democratic votes, but the OP is largely ignored.
1 Like
It would be a bell weather, in that the Russian lady received 35 times the funding to publicise her campaign, and if the left has 35 times as much of the propaganda, by suppressing conservative messaging, and negativising republicans and their policies, and pushing positive spin on Democrats and their policies, Soros-funded leftist media could help Soros and other globalists buy senatorships, house memberships and electoral college votes.
I have made several posts pointing out that this is not the first bellwether of Trump’s influence over Wisconsin.
4 Likes
Paul, she didn’t have 35x more money than Kelly. And until just recently, Kelly had far more money than Karofsky ever did.
4 Likes
Paul, Wisconsin has a very vibrant conservative media complex, radio and digital. You linked to one above. Unfortunately, Kelly thought he could skunk around only appearing on RW radio programs and attending Republican Media shindigs, and made no attempt at running a statewide campaign aimed at pushing his message out to everyone.
Unless one was imbedded in the Republican Media complex here, one never heard a peep from him.
3 Likes
As Trump supporters are so fond of saying about the Russian efforts on Trump’s behalf in 2016, “Show me where one vote was changed.”
If Republicans did not think that Scott Walker’s hand picked conservative judge was defending, that’s on them.
3 Likes
As the results come in, the bellweather nature of this vote becomes clearer.
In what we might call “the Scott Walker era” every statewide election has been decided by 30,000 votes or less. Last week, the Democrat won by 120,000 votes which is a clear sign of a shift. The Democrats gained substantially in suburban areas, which continues a major trend in Democratic victories in 2018 and also saw substantial gains in the rural areas that are the bedrock of Trump support.
AND he had the President of the United States publicly promoting him on more than one occasion. What dollar value does that bring in today’s “not a cult” environment?
3 Likes
He made a calculation that the Trump base would carry him to victory, and never attempted any outreach beyond the base. That gamble failed spectacularly for him.
In other words…SOROS!!!
1 Like
