You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–] 26221382? 0 points 33 points (+33|-0) ago 

Since it would be impossible to know which votes were the fraudulent ones, I think the most reasonable course would be to totally invalidate that district's votes and require an in-person special vote complete with ID.

The very existence of 100%+ votes would confirm for the Supreme Court that voter fraud is happening and only voter ID can stop it. EVERYONE's right to vote is compromised by cheating votes.

[–] 26226498? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Unpopular opinion: voter ID is not a cure all. Yes it will stop some but not all voting fraud.

[–] 26223339? 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

Sauce for the OP? You seem to have just accepted it

[–] 26221927? 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

But AMY has recused herself! LOL. Couldn't WAIT to start stabbing trump in the back.

[–] 26224359? 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Wrong. Incorrect. Erroneous.

She has NOT recused herself from anything.

She can not participate in votes for cases she didn't hear.

[–] 26222240? 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The motion to allow fast track hearing on a PA case was already on and J. Barrett didn't participate and make them start over on the consideration again to include her. No reason was given why she didn't participate. Since a motion for fast track wasn't approved, now we'll see what happens when that same appeal for that PA case goes up the regular slow way, and will J. Barrett recuse or not.