Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
54 minutes ago, braves121 said:

The same thing happened with AZ, but they found 100,000 possible non citizen voters but the conservative state Supreme Court ruled all these non citizens can cast full ballots this election since they discovered a majority of these non citizens were registered republicans. So i guess thing isn’t that it’s not happening, but that republicans are ok with it when it benefits them 

What is a possible non-citizen?

Posted
14 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

What is a possible non-citizen?

Someone who was registered to vote without verification that they are in fact a citizen 

Posted
8 minutes ago, braves121 said:

Someone who was registered to vote without verification that they are in fact a citizen 

How could that happen? Just curious. I would think this is happening throughout America. I believe some states register you to vote when you apply for a driver license. That might be a problem. Some states let you vote in local elections without being a citizen.  That could also be a problem. We could probably use some federal voting reform but unfortunately it is too late for this election.

Posted
51 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

How could that happen? Just curious

I am paraphrasing here so some of the details may be wrong but the general situation is thus: 

The Arizona thing has to do with the idea of "ex post facto".  People who registered to vote in the legal way prior to 1996 (or so) did not have to prove citizenship.  They had to declare it.  When the law was changed in AZ to require a proof of citizenship they grandfathered the already registered voters and allowed them to maintain their status without further administrative requirements.  So, we have people who have been registered to vote for 28 years or more (i.e. 46 year olds and older) who the Supreme Court of Arizona found could maintain their voting registration status due to the fact that they registered legally when they did register.  The idea that any random selection of 100,000 people in America over the age of 46 would lean republican is not very surprising. 

 

  • Bob 1
Posted
On 9/24/2024 at 3:54 PM, braves121 said:

Someone who was registered to vote without verification that they are in fact a citizen 

So my cat or dog? 

2BPE 11/17/24 SMC

Posted
3 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Possibly in Chicago.  

I have two cats buried in Illinois.  Can I still get them registered to vote?  🤔

  • Bob 1

2BPE 11/17/24 SMC

Posted
15 minutes ago, ionel said:

I have two cats buried in Illinois.  Can I still get them registered to vote?  🤔

Probably.  It’s less relevant for pres election.  I’ll go off on a limb.  Pencil in blue delegates for whomever runs on the pres election.   But yes.   In local elections it may matter 🙂

  • Bob 1
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Probably.  It’s less relevant for pres election.  I’ll go off on a limb.  Pencil in blue delegates for whomever runs on the pres election.   But yes.   In local elections it may matter 🙂

But if my dead cats can get all their dead pet friends to vote maybe they can flip the state red.  Sure Joseph Kennedy came up with a grand new idea with the dead vote in 1960 but even he didn't envision a time when you'd be able to sign up non citizen to vote.  

Edited by ionel

2BPE 11/17/24 SMC

Posted
15 minutes ago, ionel said:

But if my dead cats can get all their dead pet friends to vote maybe they can flip the state red.  Sure Joseph Kennedy came up with a grand new idea with the dead vote in 1960 but even he didn't envision a time when you'd be able to sign up non citizen to vote.  

I’m not sure if that’s why the opened the boarder.   Ooh wait.  Maybe it is ?

  • Bob 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

 

“Montoring?!?  We  don’t need no stinkin’ monitoring!  We are the Fultonales!”

Just trust them.  The water pipes are set to burst at just the right moment.

 

  • Bob 1
Posted

There are monitors in place, the state board wants different ones. From what I understand, the state board can't force their preferred monitors over the ones Fulton has a contract with, but I guess that will be litigated. 

Posted

I make it a practice to never believe Amuse because, well, that's always turned out to be the correct stance.

The agreement was for monitors. There are monitors. 

The county is working from an opinion from the state AG that the selection of monitors is ultimately up to the county and not the state election board, and that there agreement to appoint and pay for those monitors was ultimately voluntary. 

The state board fighting the existing monitors make it more likely that there will be no monitors at allrather than they will have their preferred monitors. 

https://www.11alive.com/article/news/politics/elections/fulton-county-election-observed-by-independent-monitor/85-5af63021-373c-4b9d-ab35-681443e7edf0

Posted
2 hours ago, Danny Deck said:

There are monitors in place, the state board wants different ones.

Ones who can count, detect boxes of ballots where none were before, determine if a ballot has already been counted, keep records that are auditable so the result is reproducible, AND fix pipes.

  • Bob 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...