Poll: Should SCOTUS override states' rights regarding when to stop counting ballots?

Should SCOTUS override states' rights regarding when to stop counting ballots?


  • Total voters
    31
OP
Lakhota

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
88,782
Reaction score
12,015
Points
2,220
Location
Native America
I feel very strongly that SCOTUS should not tell states when to stop counting their ballots - especially in the middle of a pandemic - and a presidential election. That should be totally left up to the states and their respective election laws. I think this is something that both Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on. What do you think?
Actually---federal election for president means federal rules.
Really? Proof? Link?
 

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
2,983
Reaction score
3,503
Points
1,893
I feel very strongly that SCOTUS should not tell states when to stop counting their ballots - especially in the middle of a pandemic - and a presidential election. That should be totally left up to the states and their respective election laws. I think this is something that both Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on. What do you think?
Actually---federal election for president means federal rules.
Really? Proof? Link?
They answer to the supreme court do they not? Federal rules..

and no Barrett isnt going to recuse herself.
 

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
50,471
Reaction score
9,741
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
I'd vote, but you're missing the only correct answer:

"States should be forced to obey their own laws."
Nonsense.

It’s the sole purview of state courts to determine a state’s election laws are being appropriately followed.

So it follows that State courts can decide what State laws are constitutional, RIGHT?

.
 
OP
Lakhota

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
88,782
Reaction score
12,015
Points
2,220
Location
Native America
Well, the poll is now tied at 12 each. So much for states' rights. Looks like the Trumpers are now embracing the federal government over state government. Interesting...
states have laws it's a shame they must be force to obey them
Funny. States are trying to obey their own election laws - but Trump is pushing SCOTUS to swoop down on them on election night before all valid ballots are counted.
 

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
50,471
Reaction score
9,741
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
Even if it takes days or weeks - all legal ballots should be counted.
With Democrat printers working overtime make new filled-in ballots.
Why do you perpetuate conspiracy theories without any credible proof? Democrats aren't the ones engaging in voter suppression and fraud. BTW, votes don't count unless they are validated and approved.

Oh you mean like in Clark county NV where they decided a 40% signature match is good to go. Once the ballot is separated from the envelope there's no way to challenge the match. They did that intentionally, it's not a conspiracy theory.


.
 

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
50,471
Reaction score
9,741
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
WARNING: IT'S TOO LATE TO MAIL BALLOTS.

They must be hand delivered to an official drop box or directly to your respective county clerk's office. This is being widely reported on CNN and MSNBC.

:link::link::link::link::link:

.
 

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
2,983
Reaction score
3,503
Points
1,893
Well, the poll is now tied at 12 each. So much for states' rights. Looks like the Trumpers are now embracing the federal government over state government. Interesting...
states have laws it's a shame they must be force to obey them
Funny. States are trying to obey their own election laws - but Trump is pushing SCOTUS to swoop down on them on election night before all valid ballots are counted.
Don't know who you think you are fooling BUTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT....in Penns case where they are saying they can count votes after the 3 days following the election despite no or an ineligible post mark--think again. That goes directly against their states laws and 3 of the US supremes have already cautioned them about the can whoop ass that they will be unleashing on their unlawful selves........When barrett gets in, kavanaugh will join in making it 5 supreme court judges slapping PENN supreme not following the law----an interesting precedent is about to be established about following the laws written instead of just making up chit and legislating from the bench.
 
OP
Lakhota

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
88,782
Reaction score
12,015
Points
2,220
Location
Native America
Well, the poll is now tied at 12 each. So much for states' rights. Looks like the Trumpers are now embracing the federal government over state government. Interesting...
states have laws it's a shame they must be force to obey them
Funny. States are trying to obey their own election laws - but Trump is pushing SCOTUS to swoop down on them on election night before all valid ballots are counted.
Don't know who you think you are fooling BUTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT....in Penns case where they are saying they can count votes after the 3 days following the election despite no or an ineligible post mark--think again. That goes directly against their states laws and 3 of the US supremes have already cautioned them about the can whoop ass that they will be unleashing on their unlawful selves........When barrett gets in, kavanaugh will join in making it 5 supreme court judges slapping PENN supreme not following the law----an interesting precedent is about to be established about following the laws written instead of just making up chit and legislating from the bench.
Yep, I'm well aware of all that. Apparently you haven't read all the previous posts and links.
 

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
78,929
Reaction score
9,840
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
Well, the poll is now tied at 12 each. So much for states' rights. Looks like the Trumpers are now embracing the federal government over state government. Interesting...
states have laws it's a shame they must be force to obey them
Funny. States are trying to obey their own election laws - but Trump is pushing SCOTUS to swoop down on them on election night before all valid ballots are counted.
if that were true why are certain states changing the time that a ballot will be counted?
 

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
50,471
Reaction score
9,741
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
Even if it takes days or weeks - all legal ballots should be counted.
Define "legal" in your comment.
Possibly postmark date ?
If not, then are you willing to allow for any length of time before a decision is made ?
Duh, "legal" means whatever the respective state election law says is "legal". It ain't rocket science...
So you keep avoiding this simple question.
How long are you willing to wait before a decision is made, no matter what state is counting ?
A week, month, year ?
Duh, the answer is whatever state law allows.
So your answer is yes, you are willing to wait any length of time, not knowing who the elected president is, regardless if that state says it will be months before they decide the count.
Your answer is YES, whatever the states law allows !!!
Do you see how you are grasping at straws that arent there ?
Because unlike you, true Americans are not going to wait that long.
We are not going to repeat the hanging chad saga.

Or the Frankin saga, where they kept counting and finding ballots till they got the results they wanted. The election should have been overturned by the courts because they later found 1200 ineligible felons had voted for Frankin, which was double his margin of victory.

.
 
Last edited:

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
78,929
Reaction score
9,840
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
I feel very strongly that SCOTUS should not tell states when to stop counting their ballots - especially in the middle of a pandemic - and a presidential election. That should be totally left up to the states and their respective election laws. I think this is something that both Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on. What do you think?
Actually---federal election for president means federal rules.
Really? Proof? Link?
when did we change our bill of rights to a bill of needs?
 

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
50,471
Reaction score
9,741
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
I'd vote, but you're missing the only correct answer:

"States should be forced to obey their own laws."
Which states are not obeying their election laws?
The ones where Democrats decided to violate their state election laws. PA comes to mind.
Proof? Link?
Indiana say's the Electors have to Vote with the Majority of the Vote, The majority will win Indiana, They made it law you have to give the majority the Vote. no changing it.
Meaning the Electors cannot Throw the Decision, all Electors have to go with the Majority.

Except in two States.

.
 
OP
Lakhota

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
88,782
Reaction score
12,015
Points
2,220
Location
Native America
I feel very strongly that SCOTUS should not tell states when to stop counting their ballots - especially in the middle of a pandemic - and a presidential election. That should be totally left up to the states and their respective election laws. I think this is something that both Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on. What do you think?
Actually---federal election for president means federal rules.
Really? Proof? Link?
when did we change our bill of rights to a bill of needs?
States have their own Constitution and laws - including election laws.
 

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
2,983
Reaction score
3,503
Points
1,893

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
78,929
Reaction score
9,840
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
I feel very strongly that SCOTUS should not tell states when to stop counting their ballots - especially in the middle of a pandemic - and a presidential election. That should be totally left up to the states and their respective election laws. I think this is something that both Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on. What do you think?
Actually---federal election for president means federal rules.
Really? Proof? Link?
when did we change our bill of rights to a bill of needs?
States have their own Constitution and laws - including election laws.
you earlier said no one needs a weapon of war
Since you never responded back I asked you when did we change the bill of rights to a bill of needs?
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
6,214
Reaction score
1,009
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
I feel very strongly that SCOTUS should not tell states when to stop counting their ballots - especially in the middle of a pandemic - and a presidential election. That should be totally left up to the states and their respective election laws. I think this is something that both Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on. What do you think?
Actually---federal election for president means federal rules.
Really? Proof? Link?
They answer to the supreme court do they not? Federal rules..

and no Barrett isnt going to recuse herself.
Definitely not.
The federal government does not run the elections process, like establishing polling places, parties selecting candidates, who can vote, etc.
The only federal rules over elections are the 12th amendment.

{...
Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804. The 12th Amendment changed a portion of Article II, Section 1. A portion of the 12th Amendment was changed by the 20th Amendment


The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; -- The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;

-- The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.-- The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
...}
 
OP
Lakhota

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
88,782
Reaction score
12,015
Points
2,220
Location
Native America
I feel very strongly that SCOTUS should not tell states when to stop counting their ballots - especially in the middle of a pandemic - and a presidential election. That should be totally left up to the states and their respective election laws. I think this is something that both Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on. What do you think?
Actually---federal election for president means federal rules.
Really? Proof? Link?
when did we change our bill of rights to a bill of needs?
States have their own Constitution and laws - including election laws.
you earlier said no one needs a weapon of war
Since you never responded back I asked you when did we change the bill of rights to a bill of needs?
Liar! I never said that. I think now is a good time to place you on permanent ignore. Bye...
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top