I'm completely unsurprised that Republicans are trying to prevent the restoration of voting rights in FL. Especially considering how close both the Gubernatorial and Senate races were.
tldr; GOP is facing the music that their traditional educated white male voter isn't the kingmaker they once were. So while tfa may be about demographic shifts, it explains in detail as to why GOP's gerrymander efforts are already failing them. In fact, I would prognosticate from these facts and figures that we will see an increase in the GOP push for further segregation and more "we're totally not Jim Crowing these laws but you know what we're about *wink*" efforts in all states. Especially centered around combating suburban and urban consolidation. e.g. public transport, education, and environmental protections.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
“Therefore it is further resolved: Dr. Mark Harris is Congressman-Elect for the Ninth Congressional District. If the State Board is unable to provide evidence the alleged voting irregularities would have changed the outcome of the race, they should immediately certify the results of the Ninth District Congressional contest,” they wrote.
Legislature don't care about fraud unless you can prove it changed the winner.
They're (probably rightly) betting that if you just push forward so long as the courts don't stop you the next election is far enough off that no one will remember.
“Therefore it is further resolved: Dr. Mark Harris is Congressman-Elect for the Ninth Congressional District. If the State Board is unable to provide evidence the alleged voting irregularities would have changed the outcome of the race, they should immediately certify the results of the Ninth District Congressional contest,” they wrote.
Legislature don't care about fraud unless you can prove it changed the winner.
“Therefore it is further resolved: Dr. Mark Harris is Congressman-Elect for the Ninth Congressional District. If the State Board is unable to provide evidence the alleged voting irregularities would have changed the outcome of the race, they should immediately certify the results of the Ninth District Congressional contest,” they wrote.
Legislature don't care about fraud unless you can prove it changed the winner.
“Therefore it is further resolved: Dr. Mark Harris is Congressman-Elect for the Ninth Congressional District. If the State Board is unable to provide evidence the alleged voting irregularities would have changed the outcome of the race, they should immediately certify the results of the Ninth District Congressional contest,” they wrote.
Legislature don't care about fraud unless you can prove it changed the winner.
That quote isn't from the legislature.
You are correct, I was in a hurry and also kind of mad and misunderstood the article.
The state Republicans’ 9th District 's executive committee on Sunday unanimously passed a resolution that also condemned the board for a “glaring lack of transparency” regarding its investigation into alleged absentee ballot fraud.
“Therefore it is further resolved: Dr. Mark Harris is Congressman-Elect for the Ninth Congressional District. If the State Board is unable to provide evidence the alleged voting irregularities would have changed the outcome of the race, they should immediately certify the results of the Ninth District Congressional contest,” they wrote.
Legislature don't care about fraud unless you can prove it changed the winner.
That quote isn't from the legislature.
You are correct, I was in a hurry and also kind of mad and misunderstood the article.
The state Republicans’ 9th District 's executive committee on Sunday unanimously passed a resolution that also condemned the board for a “glaring lack of transparency” regarding its investigation into alleged absentee ballot fraud.
Does a district executive committee have any sort of legal authority in the area of elections? Because that sounds like it wouldn't.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
“Therefore it is further resolved: Dr. Mark Harris is Congressman-Elect for the Ninth Congressional District. If the State Board is unable to provide evidence the alleged voting irregularities would have changed the outcome of the race, they should immediately certify the results of the Ninth District Congressional contest,” they wrote.
Legislature don't care about fraud unless you can prove it changed the winner.
That quote isn't from the legislature.
You are correct, I was in a hurry and also kind of mad and misunderstood the article.
The state Republicans’ 9th District 's executive committee on Sunday unanimously passed a resolution that also condemned the board for a “glaring lack of transparency” regarding its investigation into alleged absentee ballot fraud.
Does a district executive committee have any sort of legal authority in the area of elections? Because that sounds like it wouldn't.
No, but at the same time, it's the actual party leadership. So this is the GOP saying "we won, fuck y'all, seat our guy."
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
This is the closest thread I can think of to post this in, but remember Martha McSally, the GOP candidate for a senate seat in Arizona last month? And she lost? Well guess what. She's being given John McCain's seat. Arizona voters said no to her, and the GOP is saying "too bad." In addition, she's probably going to get sworn in just barely ahead of Sinema, making her the "senior" Senator.
+1
Options
Kane Red RobeMaster of MagicArcanusRegistered Userregular
Unsurprising. I look forward to her losing said seat the first time it goes up for reelection.
+9
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
That’s probably the best outcome for Democrats; we beat her once, we can do it again.
That’s probably the best outcome for Democrats; we beat her once, we can do it again.
Yup annoying but honestly she proved to be a weak candidate in a midterm election during a presidential election cycle if the dems can field a decent candidate she should be toast.
That’s probably the best outcome for Democrats; we beat her once, we can do it again.
Yup annoying but honestly she proved to be a weak candidate in a midterm election during a presidential election cycle if the dems can field a decent candidate she should be toast.
The election will be in 2 years. Her not being voted in this time around and instead being appointed will have no impact on the vote then. She will have the power of incumbency and will be more difficult to beat, but who know's where this country or Arizona will be politically in 2 years.
Just add this to the long list of examples showing how much Republicans don't like democracy.
Arizona does hold a special election during the next regularly scheduled statewide election. Is that the 2020 presidential election? In Wisconsin there is literally a statewide election every 6 months so if this were here the people would vote on McSally again in April.
I still stand by my statement if it's a 2 year gap between appointment and election, but anything less than a year will make losing the election hurt.
McCain was elected in 2016 and she gets to finish his term, so she's up in 2022.
Or does Arizona law make the people vote on the appointed senator during next presidential election?
McSally is expected to run for the seat in a 2020 special election, setting the stage for a potential marquee contest in a battleground state. The seat will also be on the ballot in 2022.
She just lost a midterm election that was a referendum on Trump and now she has to run in 2020 with him. Oh and AZ elected a Dem to be sec of state so they can't do a bunch of voter suppression bullshit either.
This is the closest thread I can think of to post this in, but remember Martha McSally, the GOP candidate for a senate seat in Arizona last month? And she lost? Well guess what. She's being given John McCain's seat. Arizona voters said no to her, and the GOP is saying "too bad." In addition, she's probably going to get sworn in just barely ahead of Sinema, making her the "senior" Senator.
It was speculated at the time that this is why she was gracious in loss, instead of flipping out about conspiracies like other Republican losers (and indeed Democrat, I guess, though many of them had better cause.)
This is the closest thread I can think of to post this in, but remember Martha McSally, the GOP candidate for a senate seat in Arizona last month? And she lost? Well guess what. She's being given John McCain's seat. Arizona voters said no to her, and the GOP is saying "too bad." In addition, she's probably going to get sworn in just barely ahead of Sinema, making her the "senior" Senator.
It was speculated at the time that this is why she was gracious in loss, instead of flipping out about conspiracies like other Republican losers (and indeed Democrat, I guess, though many of them had better cause.)
Arizona is a heavily vote by mail State. If you start attacking that you're attacking rich white Grandma's along with black/brown people, not just black/brown people.
Anyway, if you are interested in the troll logic of why the state GOP thinks they convince the people of Missouri that they would want to overturn something like this that they just voted yes on:
Clean Missouri was a lot of things (in fact, it almost didn't get on the ballot for being too many things) and another big part of it was ethics reforms, cracking down hard on lobbyist gifts (I think the limit has gone from "infinite" to "$10") and ending the revolving door from legislator to lobbyist, made worse by being one of the states silly enough to do short term limits for legislators. That part was *immensely* popular, even crossing partisan lines, and likely the only reason something similar never made it to the Gov's desk was because the Speaker of the House was a corrupt shill who didn't want to lose his picks for lobbying group he can work for. (he's been term limited out. I not sure if it affects him, but God I hope it does)
So the spin is that "Missourians were really voting for those things, not some convoluted* new way to draw districts." And run on that until they lose at the ballot again.
*As for what that "convoluted" way to figure out districts is, it's the wasted vote metric that was brought to the Supreme Court as proof of partisan gerrymandering. Not a lawyer, but I suspect having a state use it, and proof of it's effectiveness would make the argument as a measuring stick for gerrymandering a lot stronger.
Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tn.), a vocal critic of President Trump, on Thursday introduced two bills to eliminate the electoral college and prevent presidents from pardoning themselves or their family members.
Cohen introduced the constitutional amendments on the first night of the 116th Congress, both digs at Trump.
“Presidents should not pardon themselves, their families, their administration or campaign staff," Cohen said in a statement. "This constitutional amendment would expressly prohibit this and any future president, from abusing the pardon power.”
That might not be smart to introduce. It could be used evidence that you currently can do those things.
Rather it would be better to charge them anyway and then, if they claim they were pardoned say that the current prohibition “in matters of impeachment” on pardon usage extend to anyone involved in a crime that could be subject to impeachment for any participant or beneficiary of that crime.
It would be good to introduce such amendment legislation only after that gamble failed
The other thing is I'm not sure this would stand scrutiny in court, especially given the current SCOTUS. Unfortunately, for us, it likely impedes upon the constitutional pardon power granted to the president, which is extraordinarily broad.
The other thing is I'm not sure this would stand scrutiny in court, especially given the current SCOTUS. Unfortunately, for us, it likely impedes upon the constitutional pardon power granted to the president, which is extraordinarily broad.
Those are amendments being introduced so that's not a problem.
The other thing is I'm not sure this would stand scrutiny in court, especially given the current SCOTUS. Unfortunately, for us, it likely impedes upon the constitutional pardon power granted to the president, which is extraordinarily broad.
Constitutional Amendments are inherently Constitutional.
The other thing is I'm not sure this would stand scrutiny in court, especially given the current SCOTUS. Unfortunately, for us, it likely impedes upon the constitutional pardon power granted to the president, which is extraordinarily broad.
He introduced a constitutional amendment, to specifically curtail that sort of abuse of the pardon power.
Posts
It sickens me, but it doesn't surprise me.
tldr; GOP is facing the music that their traditional educated white male voter isn't the kingmaker they once were. So while tfa may be about demographic shifts, it explains in detail as to why GOP's gerrymander efforts are already failing them. In fact, I would prognosticate from these facts and figures that we will see an increase in the GOP push for further segregation and more "we're totally not Jim Crowing these laws but you know what we're about *wink*" efforts in all states. Especially centered around combating suburban and urban consolidation. e.g. public transport, education, and environmental protections.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/421713-nc-gop-calls-on-board-to-certify-house-race-unless-it-can-prove-fraud
Legislature don't care about fraud unless you can prove it changed the winner.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
That quote isn't from the legislature.
Good to know.
Unless it elects a Democrat.
You are correct, I was in a hurry and also kind of mad and misunderstood the article.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Does a district executive committee have any sort of legal authority in the area of elections? Because that sounds like it wouldn't.
No, but at the same time, it's the actual party leadership. So this is the GOP saying "we won, fuck y'all, seat our guy."
Yup annoying but honestly she proved to be a weak candidate in a midterm election during a presidential election cycle if the dems can field a decent candidate she should be toast.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
The election will be in 2 years. Her not being voted in this time around and instead being appointed will have no impact on the vote then. She will have the power of incumbency and will be more difficult to beat, but who know's where this country or Arizona will be politically in 2 years.
Just add this to the long list of examples showing how much Republicans don't like democracy.
Edit: 2 years, not 4.
McCain was elected in 2016 and she gets to finish his term, so she's up in 2022.
Or does Arizona law make the people vote on the appointed senator during next presidential election?
Edit: http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate.aspx
Arizona does hold a special election during the next regularly scheduled statewide election. Is that the 2020 presidential election? In Wisconsin there is literally a statewide election every 6 months so if this were here the people would vote on McSally again in April.
I still stand by my statement if it's a 2 year gap between appointment and election, but anything less than a year will make losing the election hurt.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/arizona-governor-taps-martha-mcsally-to-fill-senate-seat-once-held-by-mccain/2018/12/18/7490c856-023a-11e9-b6a9-0aa5c2fcc9e4_story.html?utm_term=.506d19cd840e
It does! Whoever wins in 2020 will finish out the rest of McCain's term and then be up for re-elect in 2022.
But mom
No, move on
It was speculated at the time that this is why she was gracious in loss, instead of flipping out about conspiracies like other Republican losers (and indeed Democrat, I guess, though many of them had better cause.)
Arizona is a heavily vote by mail State. If you start attacking that you're attacking rich white Grandma's along with black/brown people, not just black/brown people.
Well, the people of Missouri tried. I’m not surprised or anything just tired.
As part of this he also wants to make the Initiative criteria more strict so there’s less of that bothersome “voter involvement” business.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Ha, suck it.
Clean Missouri was a lot of things (in fact, it almost didn't get on the ballot for being too many things) and another big part of it was ethics reforms, cracking down hard on lobbyist gifts (I think the limit has gone from "infinite" to "$10") and ending the revolving door from legislator to lobbyist, made worse by being one of the states silly enough to do short term limits for legislators. That part was *immensely* popular, even crossing partisan lines, and likely the only reason something similar never made it to the Gov's desk was because the Speaker of the House was a corrupt shill who didn't want to lose his picks for lobbying group he can work for. (he's been term limited out. I not sure if it affects him, but God I hope it does)
So the spin is that "Missourians were really voting for those things, not some convoluted* new way to draw districts." And run on that until they lose at the ballot again.
*As for what that "convoluted" way to figure out districts is, it's the wasted vote metric that was brought to the Supreme Court as proof of partisan gerrymandering. Not a lawyer, but I suspect having a state use it, and proof of it's effectiveness would make the argument as a measuring stick for gerrymandering a lot stronger.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/423810-dem-introduces-bills-to-eliminate-electoral-college-stop-presidents-from
Rather it would be better to charge them anyway and then, if they claim they were pardoned say that the current prohibition “in matters of impeachment” on pardon usage extend to anyone involved in a crime that could be subject to impeachment for any participant or beneficiary of that crime.
It would be good to introduce such amendment legislation only after that gamble failed
https://democrats-oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/norton-introduces-dc-statehood-bill-with-record-number-of-original-cosponsors
151 cosponsors
Those are amendments being introduced so that's not a problem.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Constitutional Amendments are inherently Constitutional.
He introduced a constitutional amendment, to specifically curtail that sort of abuse of the pardon power.