ADVERTISEMENT

Unbelievable

Mel Gibson America GIF

She's as dumb as a fence post.
Who?
 
It's illegal and wrong, but not the first time paid canvassers have done it (if that's what they were). They should be prosecuted. What some don't seem to understand is that registrations don't count as votes. It's also a good thing this was caught. Shows that officials are always on the lookout for fraud of any kind related to voting.
She said paid canvassers in the video. Not sure how she knows they were paid.
 
She said paid canvassers in the video. Not sure how she knows they were paid.
Shouldn't take a long investigation to figure this one out. I know I've seen this same thing several times before. You pay people by the registration to get registrations, and most people would probably do it the right way, but many will open the phone book (or whatever we have these days) and commence to registering people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark
Shouldn't take a long investigation to figure this one out. I know I've seen this same thing several times before. You pay people by the registration to get registrations, and most people would probably do it the right way, but many will open the phone book (or whatever we have these days) and commence to registering people.
I'm sure they will be easy to find. I'm looking forward to the fun we get to have when it turns out they were paid by Musk.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: UncleMark
I'm sure they will be easy to find. I'm looking forward to the fun we get to have when it turns out they were paid by Musk.
You're right. They could be looking for a chance at the million bucks he's giving away per day. He doesn't have a condition that they be Republicans or Democrats. By the way, that seems like a barely legal if not illegal scheme he's doing.
 
Does that authority trump Federal law?
States have plenary authority. The Feds only have authority granted by the constitution. Regardless of that high altitude point, the ground level issue is that the state activity does not fit the prohibition of federal law.
 
IANAL, but one problem is that 3 came forward proving their rights are being denied, also proving that the logic for creating the list of over 1600 was faulty, and further suggesting that many others besides those 3 are being denied their constitutional rights.

What is your interpretation of the "quiet period" and its purpose?
The state law provides clear and effective ways to correct errors. The meat ax federal approach is improperly applied.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Nope.

The Virginia action is not “systematic”. It is individualized. A systematic purge is different.

I think that statute is unconstitutional anyway. That is a different point.
It's absolutely systematic. The law provides specific exemptions to the 90-day deadline, and this doesn't fall within them.

You may be right that the law is unconstitutional.

Regardless, the issuance of the injunction was proper in this case because of the potential irreparable harm to the movants.
 
It's absolutely systematic. The law provides specific exemptions to the 90-day deadline, and this doesn't fall within them.

You may be right that the law is unconstitutional.

Regardless, the issuance of the injunction was proper in this case because of the potential irreparable harm to the movants.
If the action isn’t systematic exemptions won’t matter.

If Virginia had legitimate reasons to say The Original Happy Goat is not eligible to vote, are you saying federal law must allow such a person to vote? What about 2 voters, a dozen or a few hundred?

If the voter is singled out on an individual bases, that would not be systematic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
If the action isn’t systematic exemptions won’t matter.

If Virginia had legitimate reasons to say The Original Happy Goat is not eligible to vote, are you saying federal law must allow such a person to vote? What about 2 voters, a dozen or a few hundred?

If the voter is singled out on an individual bases, that would not be systematic.
The plan was systematic. It wasn't just a series of individual investigations into single voters. It was a new administrative policy to compare voters to BMV records and remove everyone who had marked non-citizen in a BMV record (or, scarily, whom the BMV had other reason to think might have been a non-citizen). You're trying to deny the systematic nature of the policy by claiming that it is applied to individuals. But that's a meaningless distinction, because all systematic policies are applied to individuals.
 
The plan was systematic. It wasn't just a series of individual investigations into single voters. It was a new administrative policy to compare voters to BMV records and remove everyone who had marked non-citizen in a BMV record (or, scarily, whom the BMV had other reason to think might have been a non-citizen). You're trying to deny the systematic nature of the policy by claiming that it is applied to individuals. But that's a meaningless distinction, because all systematic policies are applied to individuals.
A systematic purge would be to purge all who haven’t voted in 2 elections, or all who no longer reside at their address shown on their registration, without regard to individual considerations. That is not what Virginia is doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
A systematic purge would be to purge all who haven’t voted in 2 elections, or all who no longer reside at their address shown on their registration, without regard to individual considerations. That is not what Virginia is doing.
Sure it is, they tried to purge all who had marked non-citizen on BMV form, regardless of individual considerations.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT