California Republicans Face More Losses as Late Votes for Democrats Continue to Trickle In

a reply to: Nyiah

If you're talking mail-ins, the postmark is what counts, and that's why there's a wider window post-elections for receiving them -- to account for mail transit times.

Actually, no. All mail-in ballots in Florida must be received by 7:00 of the day of election.


The 2018 Florida Statutes


Title IX
ELECTORS AND ELECTIONS
Chapter 101
VOTING METHODS AND PROCEDURE
View Entire Chapter
101.67 Safekeeping of mailed ballots; deadline for receiving vote-by-mail ballots.—
(1) The supervisor of elections shall safely keep in his or her office any envelopes received containing marked ballots of absent electors, and he or she shall, before the canvassing of the election returns, deliver the envelopes to the county canvassing board along with his or her file or list kept regarding said ballots.
(2) Except as provided in s. 101.6952(5), all marked absent electors’ ballots to be counted must be received by the supervisor by 7 p.m. the day of the election. All ballots received thereafter shall be marked with the time and date of receipt and filed in the supervisor’s office.
History.—s. 2, ch. 11824, 1927; CGL 436; s. 1, ch. 25385, 1949; s. 5, ch. 26870, 1951; s. 24, ch. 29934, 1955; s. 24, ch. 57-1; s. 35, ch. 65-380; s. 5, ch. 71-149; s. 23, ch. 77-175; s. 590, ch. 95-147; s. 14, ch. 2013-57; s. 23, ch. 2016-37.
Note.—Former s. 101.07.

a reply to: timequake

Every single DNC governor refused to cooperate and dragged their feet with the excuse that such a look into election fraud would violate personal privacy of voters.

No, not every DNC governor refused. Nor did every Republican governor comply.

There was an immediate bipartisan backlash and rejection of the inquiries with a majority of states quickly rejecting the requests.

State Responses

originally posted by: RadioRobert

Now why would someone deliberately choose to continue to break the law and put themselves in contempt instead of allowing external inspection and sharing that information? Under what circumstances would a reasonable person choose to say, "# the law, and # that judge. I'm not going to allow anyone in or tell them how many ballots we have" ?

Can anyone provide a remotely plausible answer that doesn't include voter fraud?

You've asked that multiple times and crickets. I wonder why no answer? Not really do I wonder. We know why.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: timequake

Every single DNC governor refused to cooperate and dragged their feet with the excuse that such a look into election fraud would violate personal privacy of voters.

No, not every DNC governor refused. Nor did every Republican governor comply.

There was an immediate bipartisan backlash and rejection of the inquiries with a majority of states quickly rejecting the requests.

State Responses

By bipartisian backlash they seem to mean those "red" states that were willing cooperate with the commission, but they has to limit that the type of information that they could receive. One exception was Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes (D) said that she does not intend to release the data.

a reply to: The GUT

Incompetence?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: The GUT

Incompetence?

They are just too stupid to understand what the judge meant when she issued a order that says, "You, Ms Snipes, are in violation of Florida law and are hereby ordered to comply and share this information and allow immediate inspection by 9 Nov 2018, 1900 hrs"?

A hearing she had representation at?

I asked for a plausible explanation, phage.

originally posted by: timequake
a reply to: Nyiah

If you're talking mail-ins, the postmark is what counts, and that's why there's a wider window post-elections for receiving them -- to account for mail transit times.

Actually, no. All mail-in ballots in Florida must be received by 7:00 of the day of election.


The 2018 Florida Statutes


Title IX
ELECTORS AND ELECTIONS
Chapter 101
VOTING METHODS AND PROCEDURE
View Entire Chapter
101.67 Safekeeping of mailed ballots; deadline for receiving vote-by-mail ballots.—
(1) The supervisor of elections shall safely keep in his or her office any envelopes received containing marked ballots of absent electors, and he or she shall, before the canvassing of the election returns, deliver the envelopes to the county canvassing board along with his or her file or list kept regarding said ballots.
(2) Except as provided in s. 101.6952(5), all marked absent electors’ ballots to be counted must be received by the supervisor by 7 p.m. the day of the election. All ballots received thereafter shall be marked with the time and date of receipt and filed in the supervisor’s office.
History.—s. 2, ch. 11824, 1927; CGL 436; s. 1, ch. 25385, 1949; s. 5, ch. 26870, 1951; s. 24, ch. 29934, 1955; s. 24, ch. 57-1; s. 35, ch. 65-380; s. 5, ch. 71-149; s. 23, ch. 77-175; s. 590, ch. 95-147; s. 14, ch. 2013-57; s. 23, ch. 2016-37.
Note.—Former s. 101.07.

originally posted by: RadioRobert

I asked for a plausible explanation, phage.

Oh this is getting good. Your move, Phage.

a reply to: RadioRobert

I asked for a plausible explanation, phage.

Ok. She's one of those low IQ types we hear so much about? Entirely possible.

Criminals, I mean. They tend to get busted. When the lights start shining. And election fraud is a crime.

But I think there's a thread for that. This one is about California.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: RadioRobert

I asked for a plausible explanation, phage.

Ok. She's one of those low IQ types we hear so much about? Entirely possible.

Criminals, I mean. They tend to get busted. When the lights start shining.

Well, she obviously broke the law. The judge found her in violation. The question is "why is she continuing to break those laws designed to prevent voter fraud placing herself in contempt instead of allowing access and sharing the information"?

She's just a criminal, isn't an answer.

a reply to: RadioRobert

I don't know. It doesn't seem to make much sense.


But I bet you do.

a reply to: Phage

I see no remotely plausible alternative explanation. Obviously, neither do you.

a reply to: RadioRobert

I'll defer my decision until evidence is presented.

a reply to: Phage

I didn't ask for a decision. I asked if you admit it is evidence. Now you're getting weasel wordy.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Nyiah

I disagree.

There was a "Blue Wave". Democrats won the House. What elections they lost elsewhere, they're trying to capture using other means.


Am I openly saying that the democrats cheat? Yes. They are awesome at it.

I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that we no longer live in a representative republic.



"Alas Babylon". . . . to coin a phrase.

Here you go again flaming the fire by accusing the democrats of cheating without any proof. Provide some concrete proof of cheating to backup your claim. What if the Dems claim Republicans are cheating because they make it harder for minority to vote..The bottom line is the system is somewhat broken and needs to be fixed. If you're side doesn't win it doesn't mean the other side is cheating.

a reply to: RadioRobert

I do not think that non-compliance with a court order can be considered to be evidence of a crime.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: underwerks
To Republicans, counting votes is stealing an election.

Republicans have been doing everything (redistricting, voter suppression, forcing Native Americans to have a physical address when they've always used a PO Box, forcing deadline for counts, etc), to steal the election before any vote was counted.

Then suing or trying to stop vote counts before all votes are counted.

Its confusing. Where do Native Americans want their traditions to begin, and ours end? In other words, why does it seem like they want to have their cake and eat it too? They want to vote, but don't want to jump through the same hoops the rest of us do? They can get a free address assigned to them. They just gotta call.

Every state has deadlines..

The rest of that is projection. Brenda Snipe was caught on record saying that she saw illegal voters, and DID NOT contact the proper authorities, allowing for elections to be tainted.


And please Ms. All Votes Should Be Counted, answer the question. You're on here debating with other polar opposites. Why discriminate against me?

If voter fraud is a myth, why would you be against legislation that ensures it stays that way?

a reply to: xuenchen

Why don't you wont ALL the votes to be counted?

What are you so afraid of?

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: xuenchen

Why don't you wont ALL the votes to be counted?

What are you so afraid of?

Fraud.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: RadioRobert

I do not think that non-compliance with a court order can be considered to be evidence of a crime.

Daaaang. I've bookmarked this one. I don't care how invested I was in any specific argument, I couldn't give disingenuous answers like those and face my ATS fambly or look in the mirror for a long time. Not even if I were paid to do it.

The evidentiary items are multitudinous and the particular question of RadioRobert was concise. As is my conclusion of your answer.