Republicans Thugocracy: Subtract 100k votes from Harris County

Personally I'd rather have judges. Juries can do all kinds of weird things too. AIso so much of this is procedural and technical that juries would never be able to make interpretations of laws with any kind of consistency.

But you get at a bigger problem which is the fact that a judge even took this case. This should've been dismissed immediately.

 

The Judge basically acts angry at the side he agrees with politically...... admonishes them and then lets them get away with what they want, because he hates illegals and immigrants too, and Biden ain't building that wall.

 

You would think so but that stupid Kavanaugh concurrence suggested that federal courts have the right to overrule state courts on election laws. And now all of these right wing judges are using that one paragraph as justification to take on these cases.

 

The democratic party has not become "so elite".

You are that guy.

The guy who thinks he knows everything and is so pure that he can cast judgment on everybody else and will believe anybody who tells him what he wants to hear.

Why do you keep saying what Pelosi could have done when it is the senate who would have final word?

I am not the one who needs to do research.

https://www.usa.gov/how-laws-are-made

Let me help you out.

1. If the bill passes one body of Congress, it goes to the other body to go through a similar process of research, discussion, changes, and voting.
   
   
2. Once both bodies vote to accept a bill, they must work out any differences between the two versions. Then both chambers vote on the same exact bill and, if it passes, they present it to the president.
   

 

seriously

 

In case of a "split the baby" (as described by dobro) where the judge allows the previous 127K votes, but disallows drive-in voting on election day:

Would this be an own-goal by the GOP?
Harris county is majority dem, yes. But a huge number of them have already voted, and likely a large majority of GOP votes will happen tomorrow.

Can someone who knows the demographics better than I do speculate who would be hurt worse by this?

 

Judge ruled that plaintiffs have no standing. Case over! All the ballots stick around and there will be drive in voting tomorrow.

The court also adds that even if the plaintiffs had standing, he'd still allow the votes to count. I think this basically forecloses any real opportunity for an appeal. No one is going to touch this.

 

So drive through voting is fine for tomorrow as well?

 

Yup. I guess the 5th circuit or supreme court could intervene in theory but that's extremely unlikely. So there should be no impact on drive in voting tomorrow.

I guess to stay safe I'd avoid it but as it stands right now, it should count.

 

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss.

 

this dumb sh*t should’ve never even went to court...

I have no idea how Republicans think fckery like this will appeal to the non-cult members which comprise at least 60% of the country

these GOP gremlins really brought this nonsense to court...

Desperate much?

 

TX and National GOP caught a break.

 

This.

 

They lack standing to file...

 

There has to be some penalty for filing stupid lawsuits and wasting tax payers money

 

the Texas SC ruled the votes are valid

this partisan federal judge ruled they are valid

Trump gonna take this to the Supreme Court and get handed another L?

 

So what's the basis for halting tomorrow, if the people theoretically had standing?

And shouldn't standing have been established before going through the rest? Can I randomly file lawsuits for things I have no standing in and make everyone else defend all the substance before we decide I'm a nobody who had no reason to file?