Trump has bragged about how well he does with the “non educated”
70% of the nations GDP comes from the counties that Biden won.
3 Likes
To be fair, i doubt he meant that as a statement of fact…
People are working to process the votes. In the right image, you clearly see there are dozens of people with cameras monitoring you. That’s not enough it seems. Now there are people outside carrying Trump signs, Flags, guns(this is Michigan) chanting and screaming. How the hell are these people suppose to get their work done. You want all of the mobs to join in the building too?
2 Likes
Well this question went nowhere.
The desperation of always Trumpers is becoming more evident.
So @johnwk2 can you point me to all the success Trump has had in the courts with proving massive election fraud,
https://www.zippia.com/advice/10-states-people-food-stamps/
Looks like a decent amount of red states are also states that get free cheese. So much for that stereotype.
The red states have ample numbers of the welfarians as well as the blue states.
Unless you count where all that credit card interest came from
Only because we aren’t allowed to evict them.
1 Like
Shush facts dont matter when its feelings that count.
I don’t think anyone is disputing that the one-percenters are mostly benefiting from that 70% GDP, while scraps are thrown to the impoverished in those democrat controlled counties in an attempt to keep the peace.
JWK
They are not “progressive” or “democrat” leaders. They are radical socialist revolutionaries, supported and defended by a Fifth Column Media and Yellow Journalists.
Getting back to the subject of the thread, as I point out in the OP, that our federal Constitution places jurisdiction against an abridgement of the right to vote in the hands of our federal government, there is no question that our Supreme Court is obligated to step in and adjudicate abridgments when called upon, e.g., unequal law being applied in different districts in Pennsylvania with respect to fixing ballots.
It is also time for our Supreme Court to set some uniform standards such as ridged voter identification requirements, limit early voting to no more than a week before election day, forbid “ballot harvesting”, require and allow interested parties to observe ballot authentication, etc, and etc.
JWK
Today’s Fifth Column media ___ MSNBC, NEW YORK TIMES, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, WASHINGTON POST, ATLANTIC MAGAZINE, New York Daily News, Time, ETC., and their countless Yellow Journalists who are socialist domestic revolutionaries ___ make Russia’s old Pravda, [an organ of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union] look like propaganda amateurs.
That is not the purview of the court.
Please define “ballot harvesting” so we can discuss common terminology.
I think this has the promise of an interesting discussion and something both sides can agree on.
.
.
.
.WW, PSHS
According to the Constitution, Congress makes regulations for elections. I dont know where you get the Courts can regulate elections. The only areas where the courts can regulate elections today is due to laws passed by Congress.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with our Constitution, and federal jurisdiction.
Our federal Constitution commands that the people of each state vote for their electors and their electors vote for the President.
Our Constitution by its 14th Amendment provides a penalty for any abridgement of the right to vote making any abridgement federally protected.
By our Constitution’s 15th Amendment, the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, making this right federally protected.
By the 19th Amendment the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex making any abridgement federally protected.
By the 24th Amendment The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reasons of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
And by the 26th Amendment, the right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of age.
So, what actually constitutes an abridgement of the right to vote which is federally protected as stated above?
If a State’s employees who count election results are free to count illegal ballots ___ ballots which do not meet the States voting requirements and restrictions ___ would that constitute an “abridgement” of the federally protected right to vote? The answer to this question is a resounding ‘Yes”, as each illegal ballot would in effect cancel out and disenfranchise a Citizen’s legally presented ballot and thus be an infringement.
JWK
They are not “progressive” or “democrat” leaders. They are radical socialist revolutionaries, supported and defended by a Fifth Column Media and Yellow Journalists.
The courts do not set regulations.
You are the one using the word “regulations”.
JWK
They are not “progressive” or “democrat” leaders. They are radical socialist revolutionaries, supported and defended by a Fifth Column Media and Yellow Journalists.
Actually the Constitution says nothing about people voting for the electors.
That’s just how states have decided to select their electors. Constitution doesn’t say they have to.
The 24th Amendment makes a poll tax as a prerequisite for voting in federal elections illegal.
It does NOT say electors must be voted on by the people.
Federal LAWS have been written to discourage states from choosing their electors in any other manner, but they may still do so if they wish (well in 2024…they’re bound to use the popular election for this election).
