No one is arguing to count illegal ballots. In any case, I didn’t realize that one’s conservatism has anything to do with ballot counting. 
What does the word “required” mean to you?
If you don’t over think it, it’s not confusing. If the rules say it’s required, then it’s required regardless of what the information is used for. Period.
The obvious solution is to change the law. Whining about the law being adhered to is unproductive.
Look at all of the laws on the books. In each case, penalties are spelled out for breaking those laws. If you commit murder, there are a series of punishments spelled out.
In the case of this law, there is no penalty spelled out. One can’t simply intuit the intent of the legislature. Without specific rules spelled out for non-compliance, it becomes a free-for-all. That is why this has been so heavily litigated. Surely you can see that. 
I see perfectly. We are talking about compliance with a process. The penalty for noncompliance is invalidation.
There is no penalty spelled out for noncompliance. You state a ballot envelope missing an unused date field should be rejected. There are many who feel as you do and many who feel there is no reason to reject it for an invalid field that isn’t used.
Without any guidance from the legislature, it becomes a free-for-all. That’s exactly what we are seeing.
This isn’t about who is right or who is wrong, it is simply pointing out why those in PA go through this confusion every election cycle.
No disagreement. We agree that the law says it is required. But that is all it says.
Back to my murder analogy. If a law simply states that murder is illegal with no penalty spelled out for committing murder. How would that play out the first time someone commits a murder?
And those in PA have been pushing to get the law changed to no avail. Partisanship in the legislature makes that darn near impossible.
Makes no difference what it means to you or me. What is the rule governing non-compliance? There is none. 
You are not listening. Failure to comply with the requirements invalidates the ballot by definition. That’s what “required” means. It’s only confusing because you want it to be confusing.
Then that’s on them … and the voters.
Just stop. The “penalty” for failing to comply with requirements is self-evident.
2 Likes
lol. flack from the flack-master. never ends.
stupid nonsense by the paragraphs….
Maybe to you, but you are a lone voice in the wilderness.
Every election cycle chaos ensues. That is a fact. At the center of that chaos is the PA legislature’s failure to legislate a set of rules for non-compliance. Again, that is a fact.
So, all of the chaos surrounding every election cycle is unnecessary. All they need to do is to listen to your words of wisdom. Problem solved.
I feel like I need a good laugh right about now. 
Yep! The resulting chaos is of their own doing. Something we can actually agree on. 
And yet again, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.
I’ve done my homework and have succinctly laid out the issues at hand. I’m taking no sides. I’m simply pointing out the obvious with the flawed legislation.
You on the other hand simply show up with inappropriate zingers, obviously having read nothing. I seriously doubt you have any idea what is going on.
But then again, you’ve already concluded that I’m just another dumb LIB. Kind of makes it easy for you to respond. Throw out a few zingers and then pat yourself on the back for having slayed yet another LIB.
text from the court decision.
accept it or dont.
Apparently not. The ballots in question have not been counted.
The only fact apparent is that people who believe that the majority those uncounted ballots contained votes for their side are complaining. In other words, only the losers are “confused” by the rules.
The chaos is being inflicted by the losers. If they had listened to me, they would have backed the winner.
The losers always whine. Al Gore in 2000, Hillary Clinton in 2016, Donald Trump in 2020 … you in 2024.
1 Like
