- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Wisconsin Supreme Court Reinstates Ballot-Stuffing Boxes….
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:14 am to FooManChoo
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:14 am to FooManChoo
quote:
They don't have a viable candidate so they can just create the votes they need to win
i think i will seek out a job in ink sales. business is about boom.
0
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:14 am to wickowick
quote:Still doesn’t matter.
Every drop box should have multiple high resolution cameras watching and recording
They’ll either destroy the video or just refuse to investigate or prosecute.
I say a bottle of lighter fluid and a match in each and every one of them.
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:16 am to wickowick
Every drop box should have a open bottle of expanding foam dropped in it on top of a sponge filled with ink.
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:16 am to CU_Tigers4life
I agree they can do so can Republicans
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:17 am to VOR
quote:FIFY
But God forbid we allow every voter, whether they still reside in the state or not, or whether they are dead, or whether they are an illegal, to exercise their franchise,
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:20 am to udtiger
quote:Good use of this word. Not used enough.
You're either ignorant, naive or mendacious. None are a good reflection on you.
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:28 am to Toomer Deplorable
I'm reading the majority opinion now and it's, something.
"¶25 By mandating that an absentee ballot be returned not
to the "municipal clerk's office," but "to the municipal clerk,"
the legislature disclaimed the idea that the ballot must be
delivered to a specific location and instead embraced delivery
of an absentee ballot to a person——the "municipal clerk." Given
this, the question then becomes whether delivery to a drop box
constitutes delivery "to the municipal clerk" within the meaning
of Wis. Stat. § 6.87(4)(b)1.
¶26 We conclude that it does. A drop box is set up,
maintained, secured, and emptied by the municipal clerk.10 This
is the case even if the drop box is in a location other than the
municipal clerk's office. As analyzed, the statute does not
specify a location to which a ballot must be returned and
requires only that the ballot be delivered to a location the
municipal clerk, within his or her discretion, designates. See
Wis. Stat. § 7.15(1)."
Unless I don't know how to read, 7.15(1) says nothing about ballot boxes or allowing ballots to be returned wherever the municipal clerk chooses.
The dissent is pretty good at calling out the fact that the majority made this ruling because it is "Results oriented" for the results the liberals want.
"¶25 By mandating that an absentee ballot be returned not
to the "municipal clerk's office," but "to the municipal clerk,"
the legislature disclaimed the idea that the ballot must be
delivered to a specific location and instead embraced delivery
of an absentee ballot to a person——the "municipal clerk." Given
this, the question then becomes whether delivery to a drop box
constitutes delivery "to the municipal clerk" within the meaning
of Wis. Stat. § 6.87(4)(b)1.
¶26 We conclude that it does. A drop box is set up,
maintained, secured, and emptied by the municipal clerk.10 This
is the case even if the drop box is in a location other than the
municipal clerk's office. As analyzed, the statute does not
specify a location to which a ballot must be returned and
requires only that the ballot be delivered to a location the
municipal clerk, within his or her discretion, designates. See
Wis. Stat. § 7.15(1)."
Unless I don't know how to read, 7.15(1) says nothing about ballot boxes or allowing ballots to be returned wherever the municipal clerk chooses.
The dissent is pretty good at calling out the fact that the majority made this ruling because it is "Results oriented" for the results the liberals want.
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:31 am to MFn GIMP
From the dissent:
quote:
¶72 The majority dismisses the relevance of Wis. Stat. § 6.855(1)——and simply ignores Wis. Stat. §§ 5.81(3), 7.41(1), and 6.88(1) and (2)——without ever grappling with the actual statutory text: In person delivery of a ballot can occur only at the municipal clerk's office or a designated alternate site. The majority's argument that the detailed and restrictive statute for the use of alternate sites says nothing about drop boxes because "drop boxes are already allowed" under Wis. Stat. § 6.87(4)(b)1. merely assumes the majority's conclusion rather than proves it. Id., ¶30. Given the detailed restrictions in § 6.855 on the use of alternate sites, the most plausible reading of the statute would preclude unmentioned methods of delivering absentee ballots; otherwise, there would be no reason whatsoever for the legislature to enact textual restrictions. The majority provides no rebuttal to this point....
Although the majority attempts to package its disagreements with Teigen as legal, the truth is obvious: The majority disagrees with the decision as a matter of policy and politics, not law. The members of the majority believe using drop boxes is good policy, and one they hope will aid their preferred political party. Teigen upheld the historical meaning of Wis. Stat. § 6.87(4)(b)1., which bars the use of offsite, unmanned drop boxes. The majority in this case overrules Teigen not because it is legally erroneous, but because the majority finds it politically inconvenient. The majority's activism marks another triumph of political power over legal principle in this court. I dissent.
This post was edited on 7/5/24 at 11:39 am
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:53 am to VOR
quote:
But God forbid we allow every voter to exercise their franchise,
So you’re one of the morons that espouses the bigotry of low expectations.
Go figure.
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:56 am to wickowick
quote:
Every drop box should have multiple high resolution cameras watching and recording
You saw what they did in GA. Masked dude with a masked license plate putting couple thousand ballots in.
Posted on 7/5/24 at 11:57 am to VOR
quote:No real proof of it’s legality either. That’s the beauty of it for Democrats.
Still no real proof of illegality with ballot boxes…
This post was edited on 7/5/24 at 11:58 am
Posted on 7/5/24 at 12:11 pm to VOR
quote:
Still no real proof of illegality with ballot boxes…
But God forbid we allow every voter to exercise their franchise,
Even the ones that didn't know they were voting! Luckily someone else made sure they were able to participate as well in 2020
This post was edited on 7/5/24 at 12:12 pm
Posted on 7/5/24 at 12:16 pm to VOR
quote:
Still no real proof of illegality with ballot boxes…
It's not matter of proof.
It's a matter of system design and risk management.
You have enormous power and wealth at stake in elections combined with thousands of humans involved.
We know that a certain percentage of the population will cheat or engage in crime.
So now we have high motive and certainty of attempted cheating.
As a matter of designing a system to manage this risk, do you want a system that makes cheating easier or harder?
Posted on 7/5/24 at 12:18 pm to Toomer Deplorable
What would happen if someone drops an on fire piece of trash into one of the drop boxes?
Asking for a friend.
Asking for a friend.
Posted on 7/5/24 at 12:29 pm to Toomer Deplorable
Everyone of these boxes needs to be observed and recorded on 4k video. Maybe add off duty police into the process especially for boxes in the most suspect locations.
Posted on 7/5/24 at 12:30 pm to VOR
quote:
Wisconsin Supreme Court Reinstates Ballot-Stuffing Boxes….
quote:
Still no real proof of illegality with ballot boxes… But God forbid we allow every voter to exercise their franchise,
Gawd you lefties are pathetic. Not having boxes doesn’t prevent anyone from shite. It opens up elections to potential fraud and anyone that doesn’t want potential fraud is against this. We all know you Commicrats want this kind of disorder since y’all are anti-American scum.
Even if this was a move that benefited the Right, we’d be against it. Since you Pinkos would probably find a way to put something in the boxes that would destroy the PAPER ballots in there.
Posted on 7/5/24 at 12:34 pm to wickowick
quote:
Every drop box should have multiple high resolution cameras watching and recording
That proved to not even MATTER. See GA and other places that have used it.
Posted on 7/5/24 at 12:46 pm to AUauditor
quote:
While the group has acknowledged that Wisconsin laws do make clear that absentee ballots must be returned by mail or in person, they raised the question in the case that it remained unclear whether voters can return absentee ballots in person to locations other than a clerk’s office.
Maybe it's just me, but "in person" means you hand it to someone.
In no way do I think dropping something into a unaccompanied box as "in person".
Posted on 7/5/24 at 12:51 pm to VOR
quote:
But God forbid we allow every voter to exercise their franchise,
By being lazy and NOT going to vote? That's pathetic lol
Posted on 7/5/24 at 12:52 pm to VOR
quote:
Still no real proof of illegality with ballot boxes…
But God forbid we allow every voter to exercise their franchise,
Friendly reminder that this poster spent plenty of time and energy telling us Biden showering with his daughter was a good, reasonable action.
Of course this groomer lives in an alternate reality.
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News