Elections Undecided by Midnight are Void & Preempted by Federal Law – Foster v Love (1997; 9-0 Decision)
(www.thepostemail.com)
🗣️ DISCUSSION 💬
Comments (31)
sorted by:
The Left does not believe in following laws unless it benefits them.
It's illegal to point out the illegal things they're doing!
Also remember it's illegal to look at anything until CNN says otherwise.
Hah! Pepe farms 'members.
ISWYDT 😉
or punishes their enemies. the real bitch of it all is they will support a law crushing their opposition and then when the same law is an impediment to their side it is unjust and wrong. The only thing that matters to them is the party line and they cannot see around it.
THIS SHOULD BE A PERMANENT STICKY!!
And not just here. This should be a banner at the top of all platforms. Not like that’s going to happen but…
The unseen danger here is that it has encouraged digital voting. What percentage of our economy should go toward honest vote management? My opinion is nearly 100% until accuracy can be assured.
You can have digital voting if it's 100% transparent – from the code, to the servers, to everything done in and around them, to making sure no modem or Internet connection is ever on them.
It'll never happen, though, because people are corrupt for a buck.
Parts could easily happen – for example, put the entire voting code base online – but even then it'd be done in such a half-assed way that it'd have only have the bare minimum code they have, additional libraries that aren't necessary, and overly complicated, and lack all documentation what so ever.
But could it be done? Sure. And it'd not be difficult to do and do it right. But, again, corrupt people in any stage of the process, just like mail in and paper voting, though...
The original ballot need to be human readable and available online ----- no barcode crap.
I agree with everything you’ve stated, but you have tech knowledge as a gatekeeper. My thought is vote by fingerprint and photo - digital is fine, with no person in charge of more then 100 votes. A big hurdle is the right to privacy, but I think with how our privacy is already violated at all levels - it’s necessity is being used as a way to subvert the peoples will. And should our views be private? I think integrity is not having a private view, a person can be consistent and brave and public - so many connundrums.
There will always be some skill that others lack being a gatekeeper. I don't think tech knowledge is the problem; we have just as many conservatives and centrists as the left does that can parse code and spot irregularities.
What is a problem with digital voting is still reliant on accountability. Sure, you can make the code open source and let anyone see it -- but you still open the path to exploitation because without accountability and oversight from all involved parties as well as the public, who's to say that is even the code being used?
Further, if caught -- as they've been caught many times -- if no one actually prosecutes, hears and rules on the case with harsh penalties for those who break the law and trust of the citizenry, then there is also nothing to stop them from using different code anyway.
If voting fraud – in any form – was held in as high regard as it should be (a form of treason, IMO), then if the consequences matched the crime... we'd have a lot less people involved.
Right now, there's slaps on wrists. They more to do the wrong (ie, money) than the crime they're committing.
I'm honestly not even seeing wrists get slapped for these transgressions, haha.
You can read the actual 1997 court decision at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/522/67/
All it says is that a state cannot declare that a congressional election has been decided without actually holding an election on Election Day.
I only glanced at it but agree it seems OP is putting their own, more restrictive interpretation around the ruling. I think court would also differentiate between counting the votes and the election itself.
Final thought from an election worker: midnight on a presidential election with a good turnout would be tough... You get there before 6:00, line closes at 7:00 but everyone in line still gets to vote. Say you start counting all issues at 8:00. Can a handful of tired people get all the races done accurately before midnight? Keep in mind there are sometimes different precincts at same voting location (fixable, but needs to be considered). Seems possible but little room for error.
You are 100% spot on. The problem is that they have convoluted the counting and verification processes. I can tell you a precinct can easily process hundreds of thousands of ballots before the end of the day. As long as the ballots are identical, the counting machines are calibrated, validated, re-validated, then certified, it can be a continuous process throughout the day that culminates in a finished count within an hour of closing.
100 ballots shouldn't take more than 5 minutes to run through the entire process. It is a continuous process so you constantly have several batches processing at the same time.
If Chik Fil A can pull off what they do, Im pretty sure we can come up with a dummy proof, super secure and easily verifiable process.
EDIT: if a race on a ballot is not voted on by a voter, it is still counted as a ‘Null’ vote. You do that for accounting purposes. All races should have exact same number of ‘votes’, including NULL votes.
Agree, I haven't found anything that states counting cannot begin earlier in the day as the votes are cast. Seems it would only make sense.
Can't believe it's the first time I've heard about this. I would have thought it would be blasted from the rooftops on 11/5, right?
Then again... there's a Plan... and we've caught them all.
Fascinating argument - I have no time but ended up reading the whole thing. Seems pretty reasonable
In other news...commies don't follow the law. Take a gander at the southern border, how the DOJ is used, and how the tax laws are applied.
PSA - don't ever call them 'liberals' again. They are communist. Words matter.
We should forn a PAC call GreatAwakening PAC.
ohhh bless yur hart.
1997? Then why haven't we heard about this earlier - like Nov 4th 2020?
If you read the actual opinion you will see that it has jack to do with any more recent election, and that’s why.
You can go to prison for many years for pointing out the treason of the Uniparty. Or have a mysterious paddleboarding accident.
And we all know how much respect Democrats at the Federal level have for the rule of Law.
If upheld, this would have a VAST negative effect on Republican candidates. All voting districts would count votes from majority-Democrats regions, get their candidates the votes he/she needs, then SLOWWWWW down further counts.
If you are only going to read the headline, at least interpret that correctly.
Void at midnight does not mean, "stop counting and go with the current totals."
Would give you an upvote but it's sitting pretty at 17