Republicans sue to toss out legally-cast ballots

This doesn’t reek of desperation. No sir, not one bit.

5 Likes

I will wait and see the ruling. From my POV, it looks like splitting hairs, drive-through vs. curbside. The State Secretary of State approved the method of voting, and how voting takes place is an issue of state’s rights. Tossing ballots is something that should never happen, unless they are shown to be fraudulent. I cannot image any judge tossing them over a procedural error during a national emergency. If it happens that a Republican approved method allows Republicans to toss out 100,000+ urban ballots, that is the stuff of third world countries, and of civil unrest.

I have to wonder if this was always a plan B in case Texas looked iffy for Trump. If this happens, I am going to consider of not voting Republican as the party stands now. Somethings are too close to totalitarianism for me to support. We already had a political bus attacked in our state while on tour to help the incumbent seize power.

7 Likes

Why don’t Republicans want people to vote?

7 Likes

That’s a good question.

The political bus attack was praised by Trump yesterday.

3 Likes

Given the complete and total bias of the article I believe it would be wise to wait until there is at least an accurate non biased reporting of the facts of this issue.

The only thing I can say I know from this article is there is an issue with the way they are voting in Harris country Texas. Other than that, it’s a bit difficult to get through all the bitterness & hate.

3 Likes

Oh, sounds reliable, “drive in polls”…oh sure.

Texas judge agrees to hear bid to throw out 100K votes cast at drive-thru polls

Oct 31 — A federal judge in Texas scheduled an emergency hearing for Monday on whether Houston officials unlawfully allowed drive-thru voting and should toss more than 100,000 votes in the Democratic-leaning area.

And now we know, the rest of the story.

1 Like

Why is Nancy all of sudden calling Democrats to go vote in person? Why do the Democrats wants people to vote twice?

4 Likes

I Googled that and couldn’t find any evidence.

If Google doesn’t have it, it didn’t happen. She came out with this when she saw how many ballots were being tossed for not being properly filled out, such as not having the signature on the outside envelope or not using the inside envelope. I’m guessing she is making an assumption these are all ballots completed by Democrats, so she urged people to vote in person.

1 Like

The Texas Supreme Court is NOT going to hear this case, breaking news.

That will likely be the end of it. The thing I like about conservative judges is that they try to stick close to the law and the Constitution, where voting is left to the states, unless it violates some federal act. This complaint was that the method allowed by the state of Texas was not consistent with Texas codes, in the opinion of the plaintiff.

1 Like

It’s sad if that is the Republican party intent, but if the judge determines it the correct thing to do with any facts or evidence in front of him, it is what it is.

What concerns me the most is the plan of the Democrats to back door the first female president.

If they pull a stunt like that then we will see what a true modern day Civil War will look like I fear.

1 Like

What, over a female president? What is the big issue with a female president.

2 Likes

I read that they ruled it was okay.

There is a hearing in federal court Monday.

Hard to believe enough people thought it was a good idea to take this to court that they actually did it. There seems to be no basis in law to justify tossing the ballots and it makes the Rs look really bad.

1 Like

Only to non Republicans.

There is a federally filed motion as well.

Let the law decide.

Only a few people participated in this complain I understand.

I guess you missed where I am not a Democrat :wink:

Which by default makes me Republican, and I don’t like it.

I think you both know the context in my saying that.

It’s the underhanded, and unprecedented way to get your party in the White House. Run who you think will win, and then have him step aside so who you really want in the White House gets in.

It doesn’t have anything to do with Harris being female. If something serious goes down in a matter of National Security I would rather Harris be in the situation room than someone with a deteriorating mental capacity. IF she was chosen by the people sans shenanigans.

The Democrats got the first black president. That’s fine and something worthy of being proud about. But I think they are devastated Clinton didn’t win. Both Clinton and the party wanted to " shatter that glass ceiling" as Clinton put it. She couldn’t even concede the night she lost. Sending Podesta out to do it. What’s that all about ? Was she an emotional train wreck ? If so, thank goodness she lost.

And the Democratic Party seem bent on checking with her first. Losing the election wasn’t enough to stop them from letting her call the shots. And they let her blackball Tulsi Gabbard who I truly feel would have beaten Trump. In my opinion she would smoke Trump on the debate stage.

But yet here we are with the Democrats wanting the first female president so bad it’s like a trophy to them. Even willing to manipulate their own voter base to get it.

Meanwhile Xi is loving this cartoon. Not sure about Putin. I think he would rather Trump win.

Anyhow thanks for asking me to clarify. I always enjoy throwing some support Tulsi’s way.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.