Okay, great, now we're caught up with where the courts are. Next, they'll probably appeal to a higher court, and maybe even the SCOTUS.
Election results discussion thread (and sadly the inevitable aftermath)
- Thread starter Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)
- Start date
- Status
We'll see, it'll be a massive miscarriage of justice if their votes are thrown out.
That's what all the Trump people say when their lawsuits get thrown out, right?
Can we at least recognize the partisanship and the biased hopes and motivations? When "our team" wins, it's great and deserved, when "their team" does it, it's tyranny and stacked courts and a miscarriage of justice.
Not really relevant to what we're talking about, so I don't know why you brought it up.
You're the one claiming that people are trying to disenfranchise others. Here we have a case where the election in this county was practically thrown out.
Who was disenfranchise, and by whom? You claim that votes being thrown out is some terrible thing, but here it actually happened.
BECAUSE OF IRREGULARITIES!
People like double-voting, dead people voting, people voting who had moved, people who weren't eligible to vote, not having a valid proof of residence.
Just like what Trump's team is alleging here.
So, isn't this the perfect relevant scenario? Not to the Act 77 lawsuit in particular, but in general?
So what wrong was committed here? Was it by the people who committed fraud? The failure of the system?
I thought they weren't alleging there was any fraud or irregularities? When were you lying, then or now?
I don't know what you're asking, but if we're quoting old posts, here's what I said in response to that:
You're talking about disenfranchising people, but you apparently refuse to stand by your words and claim that people were being disenfranchised in Clark County. Were they? Why, and by whom?
No.
One side won the election fairly.
The other side can't accept that and files dozens of utterly baseless lawsuits that get thrown out one after enother because they either don't have evidence or are trying to disenfranchise whole voter sections to begin with or want voters ignored and electors decided without voter input.
That all those cases fail is not miscarriage of justice.
If those cases would succeed , it would be miscarriage of justice.
There is no "both sides" in there to be had. Because the Democrats did not try to overturn the 2016 elections with dozens of baseless lawsuits to throw out Trump votes.
To blame partisanship here is just another way to refuse reality. People, especcially outside observers are not treating Viden as president elect because they are biased. They do so because they know he has won and that there is no chance to turn this over without the US losing any claim to be a democracy.
When did I say that Act 77 was alleging fraud?
Do you know the difference between the Act 77 lawsuit and the lawsuits filed by Trumps team?
You know they were filed by two different groups right?
I think you're getting them confused.
The Act 77 one does not allege fraud.
Trump's team highlights irregularities like the ones found in Clark County.
So the Clark County case is precedent and is relevant, to Trump's lawsuits, which is why I said that it's relevant, "Not to the Act 77 lawsuit in particular, but in general?"
So are you done trying to stall for time, now?
If you instantly assume bad faith on the other party, then you can't get past partisanship.
I refer you to the Clark County case above. What do you make of that? Was that dirty republicans trying to get the vote thrown out? Or were those bona fide irregularities that throw the result of the election into question? And what's the difference between the irregularities Trump's team points out and the ones found here?
Alright then, so Clark county isn't at all relevant to the Act 77 case since that one doesn't involve fraud, so you're distracting by bringing it up.
So to go back to when this was relevant.
No, because they're trying to disenfranchise voters.
YES, THANK YOU, THAT'S WHAT I SAID 9 POSTS AGO!
The link here between the Act 77 case, Clark County, and the Trump lawsuits, is the issue of disenfranchisement, which is the drum you have been beating.
You say Act 77 should be thrown out because it's trying to disenfranchise others.
The election in Clark County was thrown out because they found significant irregularities.
Was this disenfranchisement? If so, why, and by who?
If it was disenfranchisement, then was it valid or invalid?
I don't think you can answer these questions, because it would reveal the flaw in your argument.
Then don't bring it up! Seems simple to me.
There isn't. You're just distracting, knowingly distracting since you just said it isn't relevant.
You know you're really really bad about arguing a point, right? You constantly contradict yourself and whatever point you're trying to make, it makes you come off like you only have extremely bare surface level knowledge of anything you talk about, but then expect people to take you seriously.
There is, but you don't want to recognize it, because if you did it would be a death knell for your argument.
To wit: Didn't you claim that the claimants behind the Act 77 people wanted to disenfranchise others? Were you lying then, or will you lie now?
And with that, I'm going to bed.
- Status