Georgia Senate Runoff Results

[Shockm]

I agree with most of what you say here, but storming into the Capitol building is an escalation and a direct attack on our democracy.

That said, there is no justifying this anymore than there is justification for the idiots who participated in the violent, deadly riots all summer. It's all senseless and wrong. It's time for both sides to condemn it all and tell people to go home until they can demonstrate peaceably. Anything else is enabling lawlessness and leading us into further division.

You are a nice guy. However, the tribalism won’t stop if one side always concedes. The other side always wins going forward.

[RoyalShock]

And storming into a federal courthouse and setting fires isn't a direct attack on our democracy? It seems like what you are calling an escalation already happened. What happened then is JUST as wrong as what happened today.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/rioters-attack-more-than-a-courthouse-11596061930

I don't think it's on the same level as Trump supporters breaking into the federal Capitol building while in session because they think - thanks to their conspiratorial leader who has lost every court challenge he waged - a "landslide" election was stolen.

[RoyalShock]

You are a nice guy. However, the tribalism won’t stop if one side always concedes. The other side always wins going forward.

Right now we're seeing an alternating lowering of the bar. The end result will be anarchy unless both sides condemn these actions and stop the nonsense.

[Shockm]

I don't think it's on the same level as Trump supporters breaking into the federal Capitol building while in session because they think - thanks to their conspiratorial leader who has lost every court challenge he waged - a "landslide" election was stolen.

There were other bipartisan options offered to Democrats such as a commission to investigate elections for fairness.

[jdmee]

I don't think it's on the same level as Trump supporters breaking into the federal Capitol building while in session because they think - thanks to their conspiratorial leader who has lost every court challenge he waged - a "landslide" election was stolen.

An attack on a federal building is an attack on a federal building, regardless of the reason for the attack.

[Kung Wu]

Right now we're seeing an alternating lowering of the bar. The end result will be anarchy unless both sides condemn these actions and stop the nonsense.

It's the Fuddruckers scene in Idiocracy!

I actually was considering buying my wife a toilet for the living room, but I don't think she's devolved enough quite yet.

[RoyalShock]

It's the Fuddruckers scene in Idiocracy!

I actually was considering buying my wife a toilet for the living room, but I don't think she's devolved enough quite yet.

Maybe I need to watch that movie a third time!

[Stickboy46]

Maybe I need to watch that documentary a third time!

FTFY

[Shockm]

The end result will be anarchy unless both sides condemn these actions and stop the nonsense.

I agree but then why did the Dems (when approached by Rep. ) vote 0 to investigate the voting irregularities in the states who had people sign off with legal affidavits to investigate the problems.

[RoyalShock]

I agree but then why did the Dems (when approached by Rep. ) vote 0 to investigate the voting irregularities in the states who had people sign off with legal affidavits to investigate the problems.

Those things should get done at the local and state level. But the point is that it doesn't justify an occupation off the Capitol.

[Aargh]

I agree but then why did the Dems (when approached by Rep. ) vote 0 to investigate the voting irregularities in the states who had people sign off with legal affidavits to investigate the problems.

States investigate their own elections. That's not a power given to Congress. There were about 60 lawsuits brought in order to have states conduct investigations. The affidavits you speak of were in possession of the attorneys who brought the suits, but were either not presented as evidence in courts or were presented in court and rejected by the judges who saw them.

Of all the rights given to States, conducting their own elections is specific and not subject to interpretation. Congress has no authority to investigate elections. I believe Washington D.C. is an exception to that.

[Shockm]

Those things should get done at the local and state level. But the point is that it doesn't justify an occupation off the Capitol.

Without some uniformity from the federal government, this will happen in states where the Federal and State Constitutions aren’t followed. Examples : Courts should not change the dates that absentee ballots are allowed. States should not be allowing dead people to vote. States should clean up registered voter roles and not send out ballots to addresses of voters who haven’t voted for years. Voters should not be allowed to vote without documentation. Signatures should not be allowed to not match at all (through scanners). Etc.

[ShockerFever]

Nm

[Aargh]

Without some uniformity from the federal government, this will happen in states where the Federal and State Constitutions aren’t followed. Examples : Courts should not change the dates that absentee ballots are allowed. States should not be allowing dead people to vote. States should clean up registered voter roles and not send out ballots to addresses of voters who haven’t voted for years. Voters should not be allowed to vote without documentation. Signatures should not be allowed to not match at all (through scanners). Etc.

You are wanting the Federal government to take state's rights away from the states. That's generally seen as "big government".

Courts interpret laws and often rule on the intention of the lawmakers when the law was made. In the case you're thinking of, the court ruled that delays in mail delivery were overcoming the intention of the legislation and made the ruling so that the intention of the lawmakers would stay intact when conditions changed. Courts do that all the time. It's normal. That's what courts do and why we have them.

Dead people do vote. Election officials have procedures for finding them. Georgia found 2 and did not count those votes. Pennsylvania found 2 (both voted for Trump) and did not count them.

States make their own rules for sending out ballots. States drop voters from voter rolls if those voters haven't voted for years.
Signatures are checked. In addition states that mail out ballots to all registered voters have barcodes that must match. There is both a signature match and a bar code match. Georgia did a signature match audit of 11,000+ ballots and found 2 that were questionable. They concluded that 2 that were questionable (not unmatched, just questionable) was evidence that their signature matching was accurate.

The election official in Georgia who oversaw the recounts, the signature audits, the video of the vote counting, and all the rest of proving that their election results were accurate, that all legal votes were counted, and no illegal votes were counted is a Republican who was appointed by another Republican. Both the election official and the Seecretary of State in Georgia voted for Trump and were solid supporters of both Republican Senate candidates.

Just because the sources you use for your information did not get that information to you does not demonstrate that the information does not exist.

[BOBB]

Without some uniformity from the federal government, this will happen in states where the Federal and State Constitutions aren’t followed. Examples : Courts should not change the dates that absentee ballots are allowed. States should not be allowing dead people to vote. States should clean up registered voter roles and not send out ballots to addresses of voters who haven’t voted for years. Voters should not be allowed to vote without documentation. Signatures should not be allowed to not match at all (through scanners). Etc.

Democrats would take nationalized elections in a heartbeat. Tom Cotton and Chip Roy have explained why Republicans would not like the outcome.