Even cheating didn't help the GOP

What does my post have to do with communism? Personally, I'm a capitalist, always have been. Liberalism and democratic socialism are a far, far cry from communism. Most American liberals are capitalists, we simply prefer that there be some badic controls to keep people from being cheated. Sounds like you've been getting your opinions from far right wingers like Glenn Beck and Alex Jones, both of whom are raving lunatics IMO.

What does my post have to do with illegals? Do you have proof that the Democratic party wants to gove them stimulus money? And even if that's true, who do you think will be picking the produce that you will likely be seeking in your local grocery store this summer? I'm not going to pick lettuce in a field. Are you?

I strongly stand by my assessment of Trump's incompetence and the incompetence of his people. Most of the career professionals that work for both Republican and Democratic administrations have been fired and replaced with Trump's sycophants, and those are virtually all people with no experience to qualify them for some of the demanding and complex jobs they've been handed.

 

If your position is so strong, why did you have to post something you knew to be false to make a point?

 

Shifty tactics are a method of cheating, IMO. Using the courts just makes it professional cheating. Maybe you just don't want to acknowledge the facts about the right and today's Republican party.

 

So, in your opinion, forcing people into harm's way over an election is perfectly okay? Do I have you right? Too bad for them if they get sick or die, or contaminate someone else who may get sick or die? I just want to be clear that that is your opinion. Don't let me pull words off your keyboard.

 

Oh, I'm aware that's nothing new, but in this case, they were deliberately putting people at risk. I don't think that's okay. Do you? In fact, that's disgusting to me. And I say again, it serves them right that it didn't help them elect their conservative judge. THAT is justice, IMO.

 

???

 

It isn't false IMO, just legalized cheating. "Sort of" was my attempt at not being overly partisan. Epic fail there, I guess. Have it your way.

I'm not a Democrat, I've voted independent since my first vote in 1972. I don't like the Democrats all that much, but they are nowhere near as reprehensible in their tactics as the GOP, who in this case were perfectly willing to risk the lives of voters just to get one of their chosen elected. That their tactic failed anyway I put down to the brave determination of American voters, most of whom I'm willing to bet are in agreement with me, not just in Wisconsin but all over the country.

Shame on the GOP. Shame on the Wisconsin supreme court. And shame on the five conservatives in the SCOTUS.

 

So tell me what was wrong with the court decision. That's ultimately what this is about; the court said the Governor couldn't change the election date. Tell me, why the court got it wrong.

 

I see no way how anything I wrote could be interpreted that way. You will clarify, though.

Because putting people's life in danger needlessly is incorrect. Do I even have to say it? Unless you think that putting people's life in danger is "correct" or something...

I don't know anything about benefiting my party, given that my party kicked ass regardless. It was a political move by the 5 political partisan justices that didn't work. But it is part of a declared state of emergency. The reason you haven't "heard" of it is probably because Hannity and Rush haven't mentioned. it....

 

The "technicality" is simply following election law. I guess all laws are technicalities in that case.

I don't know why you can't find Ginsberg's dissent. Check your link. The entire court decision, including her dissent, is linked there. But since I did read her dissent, I will tell you that she largely agrees with you, "The question here is whether tens of thousands of
Wisconsin citizens can vote safely in the midst of a pandemic." Of course she didn't agree with you that it was "cheating."

To me this sounds ridiculous. The state already had an absentee ballot process that the governor was trying to upend.

 

The state already had an absentee ballot process. Everyone could have voted from home if they had an interest.

 

Oh! I see. And of course, in Trump's America, death is the proper punishment for not doing that.

That must certainly be written in state law, I'm sure. Or you wouldn't have brought it up.

 

"...death is the proper punishment for not doing that."

I really don't have a good answer to this sort of hysterical comment. I don't know which is worse, that you are just being overly dramatic or if you really sincerely believe it?

 

Just pointing out how easy election fraud is in a mail in vote.

 

I absolutely believe that five so-called "justices" of the Supreme Court are so partisan that they put people's lives in jeopardy for purely partisan motives, if that's what you're asking. And you have given no argument to show otherwise.

Shame on them! And shame on anybody of any party who believes that demanding that the government doesn't put the life of people in jeopardy unnecessarily is "hysterical"

 

They didn't take into consideration the reason for postponing, something most courts usually do. They just decided it based on a technicality, knowing full well that they were forcing people to risk their lives. It may be legal, but it's also unconscionable on the part of the justices.

There are times when ethics and morality are more important than the letter of the law. Even if the courts made a legal ruling, the lack of consideration for the lives their fellow Americans shows that the GOP in Wisconsin is morally bankrupt for bringing the suit in the first place. Shame on the lot of 'em.

 

He wasn't trying to upend it, he was trying to give more people enough time to obtain, fill out, and mail back a ballot in light of current stay-at-home circumstances.

The dummy should have requested the postponement a week or two earlier, then we wouldn't be having this debate. Other governors requested postponement well in advance. I've no idea why this guy waited until the day before. He seems incompetent, but that's better than being deliberately cruel.

 

The only argument I need is the court decision (linked above). Your argument on why the court was wrong and the governor should overturn state law without the consent of legislation is simply hysteria, people are going to die!

 

Sorry, your references about empty warehouses and such still makes no sense. If you're claiming that mail-in ballots came from there or were sent there, got a link?

 

Maybe you just don't want to acknowledge that you willfully admitted to willfully making a false statement in order to make a point.
Regardless - you did.

 

Happens all the time - when the law gives a drunk drive his license back, it does exactly that.

Only because you find it politically convenient.

 

I'm sorry you don't like the fact you were caught willfully making a false statement, bu noting can change that.

 

Didn't say they were merely pointing out that they could.

 

You've already given the "technicality' line. That "technicality" was the law.

We are not going to agree on this because I believe Judges should rule on the law and the constitution (which they did) and you oppose that if it prevents getting a political outcome you want. It's that simple.

 

Yep! Mine too!