“It Costs A Lot Of Money To Look This Cheap”: America Continues To Struggle With Dysfunctional Elections

Below is my column in the Hill on continuing controversies over vote counting in states like Nevada and Pennsylvania. Some of these challenges are based on the resistance to monitors and observers in states like Pennsylvania. It is mystifying why Pennsylvania is fighting so hard against such access. The litigation is only fueling suspicions of wrongdoing as the vote balance shifts dramatically. The problem is that a court could ultimately agree that the officials violated state laws but declare such challenges as effectively moot since the vote counting is largely completed. For other challenges, the litigants will need to convince a court that the number of impacted ballots could be “outcome determinative” for the electoral votes.  Otherwise, it could be treated as immaterial to the outcome.  Those challenges need to be made and supported without delay. Time works to the advantage of the party protecting a lead.  As it stands, the allegations of systemic violations is still to be made by the Trump campaign. Absent real evidence, Joe Biden has a clear path to 270 electoral votes and the White House.

Here is the column:

Legal analysis in a presidential election is often like doing a medical evaluation of a patient in full cardiac arrest while riding a moving roller coaster. For a country on the edge about rioting and claims of unfolding “coups,” this is hardly an ideal condition for dispassionate legal analysis.

For those of us who covered the elections of 2000 and 2016, we tend to quickly isolate those controversies that can actually alter outcomes as opposed to less impactful controversies in various states. It is a type of legal triage: Irregularities in states like New York or Louisiana are cast aside because they will not be “determinative.” Instead, we focus on those “patients” whose status can be changed through judicial review.

We started Election Day with an unusually high level of litigation, including cases that made it to the Supreme Court. More than 300 lawsuits have been filed in dozens of states. Many of these are “placeholder” challenges, to reserve a way to attack results if a given state proves to be a key contest. Three states are now emerging as candidates for challenges: Nevada, Michigan and Pennsylvania. The case law favors those states in defending their local determinations, but valid challenges already were working through the courts.


My selection of Nevada was based on three key criteria. It was facing new and unprecedented systems for voting, there were late changes to standards or practices, and it was going to be close. It has fulfilled all of those legal triage conditions The spread in Nevada is currently a few thousand votes, and early objections to the voting tabulation will now be magnified. The most significant challenges focus on the practices used in Las Vegas.

Before Election Day, Trump campaign chairman for Nevada, Adam Laxalt, objected that Las Vegas officials were barring monitors to allow recording objections to the handling of ballots. There also was a challenge to the use of an optical scanning machine to validate voter signatures as being set with an insufficient level of discrimination. And there are more specific challenges, like a lawsuit focusing on the culinary union and the claim that its members who lived out of state voted in the swing state.

New filings have been brought in Clark County where more than 1.2 million ballots were sent out to voters, or 71 percent of all votes statewide. The new filings have been brought to demand images and mail-in ballot procedures. Nevada has the advantage with early rulings in favor of election officials. Moreover, a challenge and partial recount in 2016 led to virtually no change in the vote count. However, Nevada remains a powerful draw for litigation since the line for flipping the outcome is closest in terms of the margin.


Michigan was subjected to a recount in the last presidential election due to the closeness of the vote between Trump and Hillary Clinton. Detroit has a long, checkered history of voting irregularities. In the primary, there were a large number of mismatched ballots, particularly in absentee precincts; those problems were blamed on “human error,” and officials insisted that new electronic ballot tabulators and better training would address the problem. But the administration has filed a challenge to the lack of access given to the process and the ballots.

Michigan’s law makes it more difficult to challenge results. The recount in Michigan in 2016 was halted under that law after being started at the request of Green Party candidate Jill Stein. The result was a gain of only 102 votes for Clinton. While a recount could be launched if the margin is tight, Michigan’s law heavily favors the tabulations of local officials.


Pennsylvania remains a target-rich environment for challenges. Judicial changes ordered to the state’s election laws have raised fierce opposition, including state and federal constitutional claims. This issue went to the Supreme Court which deadlocked when Chief Justice John Roberts voted with his liberal colleagues, which left a lower court order unchanged, and the balloting continued. Yet the legal can that Roberts kicked down the road could now come rattling back to a court at full strength with the addition of Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

Issues in Pennsylvania could involve ballots with no postmarks (which the state supreme court ruled must be counted) and the rejection of signature mismatches as a basis for nullifying ballots. There are new lawsuits over officials “curing” defective ballots and allowing disqualified voters to fill out ballots, actions that could knock out small pockets of votes which together could have an impact. However, it is not clear how many ballots would be subject to such challenges or whether those numbers would alter the outcome.

Other states like Arizona, North Carolina, and Wisconsin have challenges that are filed. However, there remains considerable question about whether such challenges could flip the states. The most promising challenges are categorical, where thousands of ballots could be rejected based on the time of their receipt or the standards used in their tabulations. Three additional lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign the day after the election in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Georgia seek access for close observation of ballot counting, a claim more likely to delay than determine the outcome.

Most past challenges in these states have not yielded significant flipping or negation of votes, however. That is the difference with Florida in 2000, where thousands of votes literally hung by a chad and voters’ intent was challengeable due to a moronically designed “butterfly” ballot that seemed to confuse elderly voters.

Each election tends to produce its own unique challenges. This time, some machines had trouble reading ballots due to the hand-sanitizer residue left by many voters. (We might have expected puerile challenges, but not Purell challenges.) Yet the current challenges will largely focus on technical mailing and tabulating systems, issues where states receive great deference. The potential impact will depend on the narrowness of the margin. This is a contest that works by inches, not feet, of progress.

One thing, however, is abundantly clear: This is no way for any developed nation to hold elections. After the divisive 2000 election, I called for Congress to use federal funding to force uniformity in election laws and standards. Instead, Washington did what it always does. It created a commission that took two years and resulted in the Help America Vote Act which meant helping local politicians to billions in federal funds. A couple billion dollars was tossed out faster than a Dade County hanging chad. Each year, we have dysfunctional elections and a lack of uniformity despite billions in federal funding. As Dolly Parton once said, “It costs a lot of money to look this cheap.”

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates online @JonathanTurley.

254 thoughts on ““It Costs A Lot Of Money To Look This Cheap”: America Continues To Struggle With Dysfunctional Elections”

  1. Scene today outside the White House at BLM plaza is calm. It’s always one side that riots and causes violence and property destruction when things don’t go their way. And it’s not the Republican side.

    1. Yeah, the guy who killed Heath Heyer in the Charlottesville Unite the Right rally was clearly a lefty in disguise, as were the guys plotting to kidnap Gov. Whitmer in MI.

      Do you have any idea how silly your absolutist proclamation sounds?

      1. “Yeah, the guy who killed Heath Heyer in the Charlottesville Unite the Right rally was clearly a lefty in disguise”

        Nope, he was a mentally disturbed young man, who lost it when he went to a legitimate protest and spent hours being pummeled, littally pissed on. beaten with baseball bats, and hit with rocks – because democrat governers told the police to stand down.

        No one is excusing fielding – but why is the governor of VA still in office ? Why are the rioters who disrupted the unite the right rally not in jail ?

        You seem to think that just because you disagree with a group you can violently attack them, and then blame them if they react.

        In the 70’s I protested FOR the right of the KKK and Nazi’s to march through my town – and when they did, I and hundreds of others protested their march with songs and candles – not frozen water bottles, baseball bats, rocks, and bottles of urine.

        “as were the guys plotting to kidnap Gov. Whitmer in MI.”
        Did they actually do anything ? People plot all kinds of things all the time. No one arrested Johnny Depp or Madonna for talking about murdering the president. People’s fantasy’s are not crimes – no matter whether you like them or not.

        “Do you have any idea how silly your absolutist proclamation sound”

        The moral equivalence you seek does not exist.

        We have seen $2B+ in property damage accross the US from your violence.
        There are businesses in minority communities that will take years to recover.
        We have seen dozens of deaths and hundreds of injuries from the violence of the left.
        We have seen police murdered., burned, blinded.
        We have seen crime rates double. We are seeing black children murdered in increasing numbers because of your idiocy.
        We have seen congressmen shot.
        We have seen continuous rioting in places like portland for months.
        We have seen the elderly beaten for trying to cross the road.

        And you think that James Fielding and some rednecks high on pot and beer fantasizing about Kidnapping Gov. Whitmer is somehow partity ?

        There is no parity – you support thugs.

        1. Mr. Lynch, when I see your name at the top of a comment, I know not to waste my time reading it. You’re nothing but a dishonest bloviating troll.

          1. And yet you continue to reply.

            Regardless, do you have an argument ?

            Your response is ad hominem. It is not argument.

            You rant about trolls – yet you are the one not offering any facts or valid arguments.
            You rant about bloviation – again – you are the one who offers ad hominem not argument.

            If I have made an error of fact – identify it, and preferably provide a primary source for the correct data.

            If I have made a logic error – identify that. Considering that you can not tell the difference between fallacy and valid argument, I am not expecting you to discredit my arguments.

            You can as you say “bloviate” to your hearts content, but if you expect to persuade rational people, you use facts, logic, reason, not ranting about trolls and bloviation or whatever other fallacies you wish to offer.

          2. Do you have a name ? Even a pen name ? What reason does anyone have for trusting ANYTHING you assert – there is no means of telling your anonymous post from the myriads of other anonymous posts.

            You can speack with total anonymity if you wish. But doing so comes at the expense of credibility. Each post must be weighed on its own, because there is no track record of credibility or integrity for completely anonymous.

            John Say has been posting accross the internet for years. You can find my posts in myriads of places. You can examine my entire history and determine whether I have made false accusations, Whether I have made errors of fact, Whether I have made poor predictions.
            You can evaluate my integrity, credibility and forecasting skill based on my record for each.

            I do not recall ever accusing a person falsely or moral bad conduct. I will be happy to apologize to anyone who I have falsely accused – had that ever occured. But we see false moral accusations by the bushel bag on this blog and pretty much every internet comment section – and those are primarily from the left. I can not say that about you – because there is no specific individual that is anonymous. each anonymous post stands on its own with no past, no history of credibility or integrity.

            On very rare occasions I have made factual errors. I have corrected these when identified. I rarely make factual errors, because they are easily avoided – we live in an era in which primary sources are readily available to all of us. We can fact check most anything. We need not trust “experts’ or reporters, we can go directly to raw data. Further should we fee inclined to rely on authorities rather than primary sources – the most brilliant people in every field are readily accessible to all of us – and we can verify their credibility against primary sources.

            I am not particularly good at prediction – though so far I am doing much better than the polsters or left wing talking heads or most posters here. Regardless, I do not claim to be clairvoyant or especially prescient at prediction. In fact I think I am pretty bad at it – but I am honestly surprised at how much worse those who are “experts” are.

            Joe Friday has claimed I predicted a huge Trump victory – that is FALSE. I predicted something very close to what we have. I HOPED for a result that was clear where either Trump or Biden won to an extent that we would not have this shit storm where we have to determine whether the election fraud was significant enough to alter the outcome. But hope is not prediction.

            I would note that pretty much no one on the left – no pollster, no talking head, no left politician, no left poster here came anywhere close to predicting this election. That is not a moral failure. That is not even an error of fact. But it is reason not to place much weight in their other predictions.

            So how about you ? When are you going to uncloak yourself sufficient to have an identity – one that can be judged credible or not, be credited with integrity or not ?

            I have been posting as John Say for well over a decade. I have a reputation – one that I have no need to hide from.

            How about you ? Rather than spew ad hominem are you capable of establishing a long term reputation that you need not flee from ?

  2. NBC reports that there has not been a formal White House coronavirus task force meeting since October 20. Daily records for new cases have been set the last 2 days. The rolling 7 day average for new cases has been increasing for weeks. The number of people hospitalized has been increasing for weeks. The number of deaths is increasing again.

    The American people deserve a President who actually gives a **** about their health. Over 225K people dead, many from avoidable deaths. Almost 500K cumulative hospitalized, some with longterm health consequences. Trump can’t be replaced soon enough.

    1. Trump was taking action when Biden said he was a “xenophobe.” Pelosi invited people to ignore events and come out to Chinatown for New Year Festivities.

      The World Health Organization did not act in the early days.

      Daily, the CDC said the threat was “low,” until it wasn’t.

      It’s too late.

      It’s a virus, its endemic, cases are way up, deaths almost non existent. If you are afraid, stay home.

      October 5th from the CDC, nearly 70,000 cases across major college campuses in the country. 3 hospitalizations.

      It was known early on that the infection was especially dangerous for the elderly, yet your Democratic Gods sent the infected to be with the most vulnerable, clearly causing tens of thousands of deaths.

      Life goes on. If you are consumed by fear, stay home and raptured in your fear. Let the rest of us take our chances and live our lives.

      1. Thanks for pointing out that Trump did a bit initially and has done next to nothing since then.

        It’s not to late to help reduce the number of people who’ll be hospitalized from here out, and your claim that “deaths almost non existent” is bull –

        I’m not consumed by fear, bro. Neither am I blind to what needs to be done to protect people going forward. If you’re too scared to deal honestly with Trump’s failures in this, stay home wrapped in your fear.

        1. I am carrying on my life having to conform to whatever is required. I have had several acquaintances infected. Non required any medication. Quit demanding someone else do something for you. I am not afraid of any Trump failures on covid, in my opinion, there shouldn’t have been any government action at all. Especially sending infected to nursing homes.

          1. Good to know that as long as none of your acquaintances required medication, it just doesn’t matter to you that hundreds of thousands of other people have been seriously harmed health wise, and even more have been harmed economically by Trump’s mishandling of it.

            1. The time to act was when reports were becoming available in December. I was keeping track of the information. That was the time to act. The Chinese didn’t act, the World Health Organization assured us that the Chinese had the situation under control, and the CDC daily warned they were monitoring the threat and it was “low.” I went to the site everyday to see if the status changed. It did not change until after Trump announced his travel ban. Trump tried his impotent measures, as it was way, way too late to stop it. I had already started stockpiling food items since there were no credible or consistent reports of what the thing was, and due to the cavalier attitude of the billion dollar agencies who are tasked with looking out for these very situations. By that time, tens of thousands of Wuhan residents had left on airline flights. Hate to tell you, at that point the cat was out of the bag, and you ain’t putting it back in. Remember “Flatten the Curve??” It was about reducing the RATE of infections to avoid overwhelming critical care resources. YOU CAN’T STOP A VIRUS at that point. The Democrats quickly politicized the situation after using it as a platform to denounce Trump. “Flatten the Curve” became an exercise to destroy the economy and lives of Americans in order to defeat Trump. That’s truly your compassionate Democratic Party at work. Pretending you can hide everyone from the virus now and that it will go away is truly insulting to anyone with any kind of reasonable education. Maybe a vaccine will work someday? Unlike Orthomyxoviridae class viruses, there hasn’t been much headway in creating a vaccine for coronaviruses. It appears the virus making the rounds now is a mutant of the original virus, and much less impactful. As stated above, in the college age group, nearly 70,000 cases across major college campuses nationwide yielding a total of 3 hospitalizations and no deaths (as of that time). The sooner this less impactful strain makes it through the population, the better. If you are concerned with your health, limit exposure to other people and stop trying to project your neurosis on the greater population. You’re in charge of your body, health, and well-being. How about some personal responsibility? Better learn now, hard times will be coming for you leftist whiners soon enough. As in the case of the virus, the government can’t protect you from everything, or even very many things at all.

          2. +10

            You nail the fundimental difference between actual liberalism and the ill-liberalism of the modern left.

            Real liberals beleive in individual rights and personal responsibility.
            That life is ultimately not fair, but that individuals looking out for their own self interests ultimately produce the greatest good for all.

            Ill-liberals beleive that everything is collective, That people are ants.
            “National socialism is the determination to create a new man. There will no longer exist any individual arbitrary will, nor realms in which the individual belongs to himself. The time of happiness as a private matter is over.”
            Adolf Hitler

        2. And you have actual evidence that there is something that government could have done that would have worked ?

          C19 “cases” are spiking pretty much everywhere – they are rising twice as fast in europe and the UK – atleast according to “official” sources there like in the US deaths and hospitalizations have barely budged. There is not a develped western nation that has done better than the US by any statistically significant degree.

          The fact is that nothing any government has done has accomplished anything more than delay.

          Unless you are prepared to weld the sick and their families into their apartments, you are not going to stop this.

    2. So who is responsible for the 657,000 Americans who die from heart disease every year (CDC)? Subtract the 33,000 dead from New York with thousands dead from Cuomo’s March 25th executive order placing covid 19 patients in nursing homes and besides the other blue lock down states……

      1. Craig, what Federal Guidelines did the Trump Administration issue regarding Covid patients in nursing homes?

          1. Being obese has never been characterized as a life saver. A virus has made that clearer than heart disease, type 2 diabetes and hypertension combined.

        1. “Craig, what Federal Guidelines did the Trump Administration issue regarding Covid patients in nursing homes?”

          Who cares ? The federal government has no constitutional role in healthcare or nursing homes.

          To the extent that any of this is the business of government at all, it is the function of state governments.

          And it is univesrsally democratic governors that have F’d up with respect to C19.

          Even today after late spikes in cases in red states, it is STILL states with democrat governors with by far the highest deaths per capita in the US.

          New York alone has 15% of all US Deaths. with only 6% of the population.

        1. Nope, it is something that gets far worse when you prioritize care to C19, and discourage people from going to the hospital.

          The life expectancy of someone having a heart attack varies by many years based on how quickly their get treatment.
          Seconds, minutes, hours count. Quick action can alter whether you live minutes, hours, months longer or live to your normal life expecany.

          The data is in and emergency treatment for heart attacks declined by nearly a million incidents during 2020.
          These are people many of whom have died or will die much sooner, than they would have otherwise.

        2. I would note that in the past – and interestingly in 2020 in China respiratory epidemics were dealt with differently.

          The traditional response to epidemic patients is to treat them in separate “fever clinics” – leaving normal hospitals to continue treating the same patients they do ordinarily.

          Fever clinics were setup in closed hospitals, military baracks, tents, but NOT in normal operating hospitals were patients were continued to be treated as normal for all ordinary medical issues.

          Everything about the C19 responses has been at odds with past practices. We have been making it up as we go.

          The entire flattening the curve nonsense came from a childs science fair project during the bush administration, and it was never predicted to reduce the total number of infections only protect the healthcare system from being overwhelmed.

          The past approach to that was to quickly activate an independent healthcare system for epidemic patients.
          This has also been the approach that has been used to deal with epidemics outside the developed world for decades and even inside the developed world in the past.

          The leftist healthcare community has conducted a gigantic healthcare experiment on the world – and failed.

      2. Current estimates are that the several month hiatus of normal medical care – chemo theraphy, diagnostics, even minor surgeries resulted in about 6 times more man years of lost life than all the covid19 deaths.

        But we will not see those consequences right away. The person whose cancer diagnosis and/or treatment was delayed several months may not die in 2020. But they will die early – months even years early. These effects alone dwarf those of C19.

        And none of this factors in the impact of the lockdowns. Unemployment and lockdowns increase child abuse, spousal abuse, alcholism, anxiety, depression, obesity, diabetes, …..

    3. And the death and hospitalization rates have barely budged – since early june. You continue to ignore that.

      I can speculate as to the reasons for the difference – but it does not matter what the reasons are.

      The actual measures of harm are deaths and hospitalizations.

      I would further note that In the UK which has reacted more Draconian than the US – the imperial college calculated the post mitigation transmission rate at 1.59 -that is nowhere near below 1.0 which is the only way to halt the spread of C19.

      A more optomistic transmission rate 1.19 – the same as the flu was calculated post mitigation for the EU – but still not sufficient.

      All that governments are succeeding in doing is dragging this out. Nothing more.

      So what is it that you wish to propose that we do ? All wear hermetically sealed bubble suits ?

      Sweden too BTW is seeing a spoke in cases – but their daily rate is very near zero and has been for months.

        1. By the way, how did this become a covid bait and switch article? Looks like they might be rolling back the Biden win as you continue to whine and wring your hands. Of course, 1,200 additional deaths are a good source of Democratic votes in the next election.

          1. 1700 people died yesterday of Cancer – 600K die every year of Cancer. More will die because of delayed treatment and delay detection.

        2. As I said the death rate has floated arround 1000 since early june.

          In April when there were only 33K new cases per day there were almost 2500 deaths/day.
          What has changed ?
          If things are really 4 times worse than April- 15000 people should be dying each day – not less than 1/10th that.

          The UK and EU are purportedly seeing spikes much larger than the US – what is Trump doing better than they are ?


    4. Which deaths were avoidable and how ?

      The only avoidable deaths I am aware of are those in care homes where democratic governors sent recovering C19 patients to infect old people.

      Can you cite another example of an “avoidable death” ?

      What are you proposing ? Magic ?

      No where – not in the US, not in the UK, not in the EU have different policies reduced the transmission rate below 1.0.

      And absent reducing the transmission rate below 1.0 all you do is prolong this – you do HARM, not good, and you leave the most vulnerable at risk for longer.

      Why am I surprised

      Math, Facts, Science – those are all things that you are incapable of.

    5. BTW heatlhcare is not listed anywhere in the constitution as an enumerated power or responsibility of the federal government.

  3. https://monsterhunternation.com/2020/11/05/the-2020-election-f*ckery-is-afoot/

    Interesting read (excerpt) —->

    “Last night I was on Facebook talking about the crazy high, 3rd world dictatorship level voter turnout levels in the deep blue areas of these swing states was very suspicious. Somebody gas lighted me about how “I’d have to do better than that”, so this was my quick reply, listing off the questionable bullsh*t I could think of off the top of my head:

    The massive turn out alone is a red flag.

    But as for doing better…

    The late night spikes that were enough to close all the Trump leads are a red flag.

    The statistically impossible breakdown of the ratios of these vote dumps is a red flag.

    The ratios of these dumps being far better than the percentages in the bluest of blue cities, even though the historical data does not match, red flag.

    The ratios of these vote dumps favoring Biden more in these few battlegrounds than the ratio for the rest of the country (even the bluest of the blue) red flag.

    Biden outperforming Obama among these few urban vote dumps, even though Trump picked up points in every demographic group in the rest of the country, red flag.

    The poll observers being removed. Red flag.

    The counters cheering as GOP observers are removed, red flag.

    The fact that the dem observers outnumber the GOP observers 3 to 1, red flag (and basis of the first lawsuit filed)

    The electioneering at the polls (on video), red flag.

    The willful violation of the court order requiring the separation of ballots by type, red flag.

    USPS whistleblower reporting to the Inspector General that today they were ordered to backdate ballots to yesterday, red flag.

    The video of 2 AM deliveries of what appear to be boxes of ballots with no chain of custody or other observers right before the late night miracle spikes, red flag.

    Any of those things would be enough to trigger an audit in the normal world. This many flags and I’d be giggling in anticipation of catching some thieves.

    And it isn’t that I have to do better. I’m just an gen pop observer who happens to be a retired auditor with a finely tuned bullsh*t detector. This is going to the courts.


    So now I want to delve into some of these some more. The problem is that there’s a ton of info swirling around, some good, some crap. It doesn’t help that reporters are usually dishonest or not very bright and absolute trash at presenting data. Part of our problem is Big Tech is actively stomping on stories that make their guy look bad. (while compiling these I discovered that several of the links I’d looked at yesterday had been vanished by Facebook or Twitter)

    For the last four years half the country was all “Trump is illegitimate! He’s not my president! He stole the election!” so on and so forth, and that was all based upon nebulous ideas about “Russian Interference”, The Russian Interference mostly boiled down to them buying ads on Facebook, or having fake bots trolling on Twitter last time. This time the actual giant megacorporations, Facebook, Twitter, and Google themselves have actively censored stories in order to protect their candidate. So you think after this pile of suspicious election clusterf*cks that makes the game look totally rigged, the other half of the country is going to accept Joe Biden as legitimate? Oh hell no….”

  4. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. —Joseph Stalin

  5. It’s a fact that some states legally sent mail-in ballots to all registered voters.

      1. I am not interested in arguments about Just. That all too easily feeds into leftist nonsense about fair – which is an subjective criteria.

        Thereare two issues – the first is following the law and rules as they are – that is not being done.

        The second is constructing the laws and rules so that they are not invitations to fraud – that mistake was made long ago.
        In some instances months, in others years.

        We had the first warnings with bush V Gore.

        We had an oportuinty to avoid future problems in our elections.

        Structuring an election such that fraud is near impossible is not that hard.

        Yet, we deliberately avoid it.

        Structuring elections such that the courts do not have to decide difficult issues is also not that hard.
        Yet we deliberately avoid it.

        I have been fighting for election integrity since Bush V. Gore.

        I have fought republicans and I have fought democrats.

        Neither party really wants to fix things.

        1. I am not interested in arguments about Just. That all too easily feeds into leftist nonsense about fair – which is an subjective criteria.

          And I don’t care that you regret getting yourself sucked into worthless debates. So stop feeding them.

    1. Dead, moved out of state, just anybody with or without a pulse. Great policy indeed?

    2. That is correct. It is also irrelevant as it is none of the states we are fighting over.

      It is not possible to conduct mailin voting without a much higher opportunity for Fraud.

      But it is possible to conduct with less ease of fraud. Must of what we have done in 2020 is to do so in the worst possible ways.

      If you beleive you can win following the rules – FOLLOW THE RULES.

      When you do not – you are not trustworthy.


    In 1861, President of the United States Abraham Lincoln took two steps intended to maintain order and public safety in the now-divided country.

    In his capacity as commander in chief, Lincoln declared martial law in all states and ordered the suspension of the constitutionally protected right to writs of habeas corpus in the state of Maryland and parts of the Midwestern states.

    – Robert Longley

    Democrats have criminally engineered, corrupted and commandeered the U.S. election process commencing Civil War II.

    President Trump must declare martial law, suspend Habeas Corpus, prosecute the criminal election fraud perpetrators, seize voting apparatus in all 50 states and conduct a complete recount of “legal” votes.

  7. One thing is abundantly clear: Since Progressives have vacuumed up state authority into the federal bureaucracy over the last 100 years or so, the obvious question then is why have they worked so hard in favor of the states to retain control over the election process? Because they believe in state’s rights? Because they trust the states to run a process that affects the entire nation better than the federal government? Because they believe the election process will be better controlled if it remains close to the people? Those ideas are antithetical to a progressive worldview.

    What happens if there is one, non-partisan process for elections? What happens if there is one standard process for voter registration? What happens when everyone is provided at no cost to the voter, an ID specifically for voting? What happens when the notion of voter suppression or disenfranchisement is removed from the talking points? What happens when the process for absentee ballots, mail-in ballots, early voting, same day voting, time/date stamps, poll closings, poll monitoring, vote counting and reporting is uniform across the nation? Why would a nation that will spend billions if not trillions of dollars on unending wars, space exploration, etc., not commit to design an electoral process that is unassailable? The answer to that question will tell you what motivates those that rule over this country.

    1. Olly, who says Democrats are any more opposed to national standards than Republicans? I have never seen any article implying that’s the case.

      One should note that a National I.D. Card was explored at least 20 years ago. But it was conservatives more than liberals opposed to that idea.

      1. Well, a national voter ID card would certainly result in the suppression of hundreds of thousands of votes the DNC has reserved for themselves in case the people don’t vote properly.

      2. who says Democrats are any more opposed to national standards than Republicans? I have never seen any article implying that’s the case.

        It’s called willful ignorance. For instance, I didn’t imply opposition has come from either party. I specifically identified progressives. They exist in both parties. Now if you care to answer the broader question of why the progressives aspire to increase the federal bureaucracy, especially on issues/policies that impact the entire nation, they leave the electoral process to the states? Especially given the fact that we are guaranteed a train wreck every general election? What is the logical explanation?

      3. We do not need a national ID card. It was proposed by Clinton almost 30 years ago not 20.

        That is an irrelevant tangent.

        Worse it is also false. We have subsequently passed the “real ID Act” – Bush and republicans did that post 9/11 and all drivers licenses are slowing being transformed into national ID cards anyway. An that occured almost 20 years ago.

        It is racist to claim that minorities are unable get the ID they need to vote.

    2. Olly, lets’ see if you are open to the kind of compromise our democracy is supposed to encourage. How about we have a national voter ID, but the government will be proactive in getting them to the old, infirm,and poor so there is no element of prejudiced suppression involved. Your idea suggest you are open to that. Then, we also include in this election bill a stipulation that states electors must be awarded proportionally to the vote within the state – no more winner take all nonsense – , and that apportioning of congressional districts shall be done by bi-partisan commissions, not the victor in the last election? You might include state legislatures in that, but then it is no longer about federal elections only.

      What do you say?

      1. A national voter ID is an easy yes. Regarding the electoral college; has a study ever been conducted where they calculated the results based on proportion, rather than winner-take-all? Instead of winner-take-all, why not go by state delegations to the House, 1 vote each?

            1. God only knows what we are likely to see moving forward.

              One county in Michigan has revised their vote totals flipping 6000 votes from Biden to Trump, because some “glitch” in their scanning software miscounted votes for Trump as Biden votes.

              There are 50 other counties in Michigan using the same software.

              Democratic election officials have thrown legally required observers out of mailin counting operations in all contested states.

              This fundimentally makes any fraud uncorrectable.

              Normally observers are allowed to object to specific ballots where signatures do not match or where they have reason to suspect the ballot might not be an elligable voter. These ballots are then separated and their validity can be LATER explored further before they are counted.

              But once a mailin ballot is stripped from its outer envelop there is no means to go back. You are stuck rejecting the entire pool of mailin ballots or accepting them all.

              If democrats wanted a fraud free election – they would have followed the law and allowed observers and sorted out questionable ballots.

              No matter what the outcome of all this – democrats are going to look like crooks.

            1. I’m not the guy y’all rag on as Paint Chips. Grow up.

              I may have misunderstood what you meant by state delegations. Do you mean 1 vote per delegation (as occurs if the EC deadlocks) or 1 vote per House member? The former would be worse, the latter would be OK.

              1. I do not care what he or you mean.

                I care what the constitution requires.

                If you are not happy with that – ammend it.

                Or better yet – actually do what it takes to eliminate fraud in elections and avoid this problem.

                I would advise the states that have serious voting problems at the moment to immediately convene their legislatures and announce that they are scheduling a new in person vote quickly enough to meet the deadline for certifying the vote.

                That is likely the best means to resolve this quickly.

                It is likely the only way for the democratic party to avoid being stigmatized as the party of rampant election fraud.

                I am not sure what the alternatives are.

                It is likely that SCOTUS requires PA to discard all votes received after 8PM election day. That likely throws PA to Trump.

                In other states where there is clear evidence that more than sufficient fraudulent votes were cast to tip the election, SCOTUS can preclude the state from certifying the election.
                I beleive the state legislature would have the power to appoint its own slate of electors. Alternately that states electors could not vote, and that would likely throw the election to the house.

                Though most of this does not matter. It does not matter what SCOTUS does, It does not matter what the legislatures do, it does not matter what the house does.

                No matter what the left will have to contend with the stench of fraud.

                This is the price of “Buy any means necescary”.

          1. “State delegations to the House would make things worse, not better.”
            You say they would be worse – what is your criteria for that ?

            Are they worse – because they do not produce your desired outcome ?
            Are they worse – because they do not reflect your personal values ?

            There is not an actual objective standard for this.

        1. Olly, winner take all leads to random outcomes and most states being ignored during the campaign. It has also led to the overall vote winner losing the election twice in the last 20 years (16 years before this one). If there was a rational explanation and benefit for that, that would be one thing, but there isn’t. To understand that consider that if Kerry had won 60k more votes in Ohio in 2004, he’d have been elected with a minority of the vote total. How does that – Kerry, Bush, and Trump – make any sense? It doesn’t.
          Proportional allocation would not be perfect as some discrepancies from the popular vote could still occur, but they would be much less often and could be justified by the extra vote small states get by virtue of being a state (S Dakota and N Dakota combined have 1.6 million people and 4 senators and 2 representatives. That’s less than /2 the population.of greater Denver. All voters in all states would be represented in the tally.

          1. Begin with the understanding that this is the United States of America. Understand that we have a bicameral legislative branch because of the great compromise that protected the rights of the smaller populated states. The 17th amendment led to a vacuum of power going to the central government. This has done great damage to the 9th and 10th amendments. The popular vote has encroached on state’s rights enough. The electoral college, as it stands today is the last vestige to protect the minority populated states. Lastly, until we start seeing these large metro areas (and states) that have been run into the ground by progressive Democrats start flipping to constitutional governance, then I will never support any change that would give those sh!thole locations any more control over our federal government.

            1. Olly, nice rant, but the winner take-all EC does not protect small states. Think about it and try to explain how it does if you can. What “protects” the small states is their disproportionate representation in the EC and the Senate. The would not change with proportional allocation of EC votes within state delegations.

              As to your hatred of America, maybe you should have that checked or move.

              1. The would not change with proportional allocation of EC votes within state delegations.

                Prove it.

                As to your hatred of America, maybe you should have that checked or move.

                You’ve ignored the rule of law. You defend documented criminal politicians. You defend election fraud. You support anarchists. It is you that hates anything intended to preserve this constitutional republic. No, I don’t hate America. I hate the domestic enemies seeking to fundamentally transform it into something unrecognizable to freedom and liberty loving people everywhere. That means you and your ilk.

              2. “Olly, nice rant, but the winner take-all EC does not protect small states.”

                Both false and irrelevant. It is the currently constitutional approach.
                If you want something different – amend the constitution.

                “Think about it and try to explain how it does if you can. What “protects” the small states is their disproportionate representation in the EC and the Senate. The would not change with proportional allocation of EC votes within state delegations.”

                It is not anyone’s obligation to explain the status quo to you. If you wish to change it – amend the constitution.

                “As to your hatred of America, maybe you should have that checked or move.”

                More leftwing nut hate mongering. It is not Olly or anyone outside the left that “hates” america. None of them are trying to rewrite history. They are not constantly making false accusations. They are not trying to silence anyone. They are not trying to count fraudulent votes. They are not constantly accusing everyone they disagree with of being a racist, sexist, homophobic hate monger.

                Sorry Joe but it is crystal clear that you are the one drowning in hatred for the others, for the country.

                I have little problem with those who say they love the country but seek to make improvements. But you can not claim to both love the country and seek to rewrite history and make infinite changes.

                If you want free education, free healthcare, if you want to end free markets, if you want wholesale changes to the constitution – you do not love the country YOU hate it. Individual liberty and personal responsibility are the ideological foundations of this country.

                They are America. If you seek to change them, if you want socialism, if you want more social control and less individual control – you want something that is not America. No one is denying you the freedom to want a different country than we have. But do not pretend that you you can want to radically change the country and not hate it as it is.

          2. “Olly, winner take all leads to random outcomes and most states being ignored during the campaign. ”
            So ?
            BTW the results are not “random” – they are just out of sink with the popular vote.
            I would further note that the only states that get “ignored” are those states where the outcome of the election is near certain.

            Why should either Biden or Trump campaign in Califronia ? It is not going to change the vote in CA.

            Separately – the president is not the only person on the ballot in each state.
            Republcians contest Senate, Representative, Governor, and myriads of local posts in CA.
            No state gets “ignored”.

            Even this year democrats spent Billions on elections in states that Biden never visited and that Trump was going to win.
            No states get ignored.

            “It has also led to the overall vote winner losing the election twice in the last 20 years (16 years before this one).”
            So ? Presidents are not and never have been elected by the popular vote. The constitution as ratified in 1787 only elected members of the house of representatives by popular vote. Subequently we changed to electing senators by popular vote.
            If you want the president elected by popular vote – amend the constitution.

            “If there was a rational explanation and benefit for that, that would be one thing, but there isn’t.”
            Of course there is. It is quite simple – power withing the federal government is DELIBERATELY disbursed, this is why the terms for senators, representatives and presidents are not the same, and why the rules for electing each are different. The federal government is deliberately structured such that it will not easily be put into one place as a consequence of some temporary bout of public passions.

            “To understand that consider that if Kerry had won 60k more votes in Ohio in 2004, he’d have been elected with a minority of the vote total.”
            So be it. Regardless, Kerry did not get 60K more votes in Ohio.

            “How does that – Kerry, Bush, and Trump – make any sense? It doesn’t.”
            You confuse making sense with getting your prefered outcome.

            “Proportional allocation would not be perfect as some discrepancies from the popular vote could still occur, but they would be much less often and could be justified by the extra vote small states get by virtue of being a state (S Dakota and N Dakota combined have 1.6 million people and 4 senators and 2 representatives. That’s less than /2 the population.of greater Denver. All voters in all states would be represented in the tally.”

            You thesis is flawed because it presumes that conformance to the popular vote is objectively the correct result.

            There is no objectively correct.

            Rather than fixate on mechanics which might alter the outcome but have no impact on the legitimacy. why aren’t you interested in fraud and error – which undermine the legitimacy ?

        2. National ID already exists – States have been required since Post 9/11 to conform their drivers licenses and state ID’s to the Real ID Act.

          The Model Voter ID law – which is what every state with Voter ID requirements uses, has provisions for voting without voter ID, as well as myriads of provisions for getting ID for people with problems or access issues.

          Further if Democrats are concerned – they have no problems bussing people to polls, or helping them fill out and delivering their mail in ballots, they should perform a real service to their constituents by helping them get ID – if that really were a consequential problem.

      2. “Olly, lets’ see if you are open to the kind of compromise our democracy is supposed to encourage. ”

        Our government is deliberately setup to AVOID compromise.

        Compromise is a tool, it is not a value.

        “How about we have a national voter ID”
        We already have that – look into the real ID act – it requires statesd to conform their drivers licesnses and State ID;s to federal standards.

        ” but the government will be proactive in getting them to the old, infirm,and poor so there is no element of prejudiced suppression involved.”

        Are you entirely cluesless about existing state ID laws – including voter ID ? Everything you are asking for and more is ALREADY in them.

        Not only is every element you cite – and then some already present in the voter and other ID laws of every state with such laws,
        but with respect to voting you can vote provisionally without ID if you sign an affidavit that swears that you are who you say you are.

        “Your idea suggest you are open to that.”
        Again – what you claim to be a compromise is the law in I beleive 29 states that have voter ID laws TODAY.

        “Then, we also include in this election bill a stipulation that states electors must be awarded proportionally to the vote within the state”
        Nope. that ultimately has exactly the same effect as national popular vote – you will find all candidates fawning over big cities and no candidate or party will ever care about those outside dense urban areas.

        “– no more winner take all nonsense –”
        It is not nonsense, it is the constitution.

        “, and that apportioning of congressional districts shall be done by bi-partisan commissions,”
        Right “bi partisan commissions” – so instead of having corrupt politicians determine voting districts we should create cinecures for unelected corrupt politicians.

        “not the victor in the last election?”
        Gerrymandering is a stupid non-issue. There are only two means to gerrymander – the first and oldest is to create secure seats for incumbents. That comes at the expense of the party. The 2nd is to maximize the number of representatives for a given party.
        All efforts to do that come with the nasty problem that very small changes in voting result in complete flips of the party in power.

        Contra left idiots, gerrymandering probably does not effect the representation in the house of representatives by more than 4 seats accross the entire country. Any shift larger than about 1 seat per state is dangerous.

        I prefer to keep corruption confined to elected officials.

        “What do you say?:”

        NO. Follow the constitution. Matters regarding federal elections are the domain of congress and the state legislatures – not the state courts, not the governors.

        Now how about some actually meaningful changes.

        As noted existing voter ID laws already meet every one of your criteria. So lets pass a national voter ID law.
        You can not vote without presenting valid ID.

        Of course that would require either in person voting or at the very least personally dropping off your ballot rather than mailing it.

        Next, we really need to completely eliminate mailin voting – because there is no way to prevent vote buying if you do not vote in person.

        Absentee ballots are conducted pretty much the same way as in person ballots – except that you visit the county registrar (or a consultate if you are overseas), and you vote as normal – ID and everything and they YOU seal your ballot in double envelopes.
        All this is done under the supervision of the registrar or someone at the consolate so it is impossible to sell your vote.

        Given how much was spent in the 2020 election you should not discount the problem of selling votes. Thus far the only eividence that it occured is the PV expose on Rep Omar, Regardless, it is trrivial with mail in ballots.

        Next: In person voting. No early voting, But run the election over a full 24hours. That addresses all the work issues of everyone.
        It also allows the polls to be open in all states concurrently regardless of time zone.
        End the election at the same moment everywhere.

        Every congressional district should be afforded exactly the same amount of funding – therefore there is no reason that any district should have long lines or be late. Urban districts should have a slight advantage.

        Voters are handed a blank ballot, they fill that in in private, and they have it scanned AND COUNTED by a scanner after which the filled in ballot is locked in a ballot box and preserved for later checks, and recounts. But the actual counting occurs when a persons vote is scanned.

        Finally at the close of polls – at the same time accross the country each polling place reports its totals publicly to the state – not at any time before. There is a narrow window for reporting which if missed results in potential criminal charges against election officials.

        One of the other windows for election fraud is early voting and “late” voting.

        It is critical that the voting window is small. Otherwise information about the results in one area can get to others and that creates a competitive incentive for voting from

        Next, the existing federal law requiring voter registration lists to be accurately maintained and dead and otherwise inactive voters are purged. Again lest start prosecuting state officials who fail to do so.

        The vast majority of voter registration lists in the US have 10-20% of people who are no longer voters.
        In several places we have more voters than people.

        stop excusing as incompetence conduct that easily could be fraud.
        If you give people excuses to not follow the law – they wont.
        That applies to those handling our elections.

        Last – get rid of the courts and recounts. as the means of resolving close elections.

        In any election where the “winner” does not get 51% of the vote, have a runnoff.
        If the runnoff does not decide the election – again by 51% of the vote – toss a coin.

  8. “After the divisive 2000 election, I called for Congress to use federal funding to force uniformity in election laws and standards. Instead, Washington did what it always does. It created a commission that took two years and resulted in the Help America Vote Act which meant helping local politicians to billions in federal funds.”

    Wow. That is certainly a surprise. Change is coming though, just not in methods immediately understood.

    1. I do not know what is coming. But the left is playing with fire.

      They do not seem to grasp how incredibly dangerous all this is.

      I will give republicans alot of the blame for the HAV – the Republican response to the 2000 election was ABYSMAL.

      We have had numerous close elections since then. We need reliable means of resolving those that do not involve courts and lawyers.

      Fixing our elections is pretty trivial.

      It is not hard at all to secure in person voting. All it requires is voter ID, and no one touching the ballot until it is scanned and counted but the voter.

      Regardless, the left does not grasp that the law must be followed – regardless of what it is, This oops, it is all over and you can’t undo things nonsense just makes people angry.


    Trump’s rhetoric has even GOP officials worried, since his tweets might discourage his own supporters from voting by mail—skewing races while simultaneously making MAGA-ites less likely to trust a loss. Both Pennsylvania, where 70 percent of the absentee ballot requests came from Democrats, and Indiana, where 55 percent of its mail-in ballot requests came from Democrats, give GOP leaders pause.

    Despite the concerns, Trump’s campaign to undermine confidence in the election shows no sign of slowing: Earlier this month, he tweeted, “Mail-In Ballot fraud found in many elections. People are just now seeing how bad, dishonest and slow it is. Election results could be delayed for months. No more big election night answers? 1% not even counted in 2016. Ridiculous! Just a formula for RIGGING an Election….”

    Such comments are worrisome not just because of their short-term impact on the voting procedures, but because they appear to lay the groundwork for a challenge to the results themselves, particularly if a close loss or general confusion around the election gives him even a remotely plausible—however far-fetched—excuse to fight. In the same interview with POLITICO last month in which he cast doubt on the mail-in vote, he didn’t answer whether he’d accept the outcome of the election. “Hillary kept talking about she’s going to accept, and they never accepted it. You know. She lost, too. She lost good,” he said, ignoring that Clinton conceded decisively the day after the 2016 election.

    Edited from: “8 Big Reasons Election Day 2020 Could Be A Disaster”

    Politico, 7/24/20

    Those of us outside the rightwing bubble saw countless stories like the above in mainstream media. They were a regular feature for months. Everyone knew that Trump was doing everything possible to sabotage this election. Trump sabotage of the Postal System was documented in real time.

    Therefore it is no surprise this election is ending with a wave of frivolous lawsuits by the Trump campaign. One could have bet their life savings this would be the end game for Donald Trump; an impeached president who ‘never’ won the Popular Vote. Of course he goes out with sour apple lawsuits. Trump’s entire presidency has been a marathon of grievances.

    Speaking of the Popular Vote, Biden has maintained a lead of 4 million-plus for the last 24 hours. Yet Trump thinks he can litigate an Electoral College-Only victory. Like that would ‘restore faith in Democracy’! Like Americans would really think: “Man, I’m glad he pulled off another Electoral College-Only victory”.

    If the Electoral College didn’t exist, this race would be over. Only ‘because’ of the Electoral College is Trump entertaining a litigated victory.

    1. Your comment was disqualified and ignorant, ballots WHERE NOT REQUESTED they were mailed regardless.

      1. That’s legal in some states, even if you do not like it.

        If you object to it being legal, you can try to work to change the law.

        1. Who said anything about like or dislike just challenged statement of requesting ballot, statement was misleading as they were not requested by the voter. Facts Matter!.

        2. What is legal in some states is NOT legal in all states.

          The places we have problems right now are not following their own laws on multiple levels.

          I would further note there are multiple independent issues:

          Most of the recent spate of mailin elections have been imposed by governors by fiat.
          That never should have occured.

          Separately no state legislature ever should have agreed to a mail in system.

          The convenience of the voters is not a legitimate tradeoff for trust in the integrity of the results.

          Regardless of how things SHOULD have been done – all states are at the very least required to follow their own rules and laws – they are not. The PA Supreme court ordered the state of PA to violate the PA constitution – and ADMITTED doing so.

          Many states have laws requiring elections be observed by representatives of both parties – that is NOT being followed.

          Federal law requires that voter registration databases are purged of inelligable voters – that is not being followed – and dead people and out of state residents have voted.

          If you can not follow the rules – you can not be trusted.

    2. Not in the right wing bubble. The change has started. Trump connected the Republican party, who was formerly the party of the connected elite, to a wider array of minority voters whose primary concerns are jobs and family. Most of us now see the Democratic Party as the entitled, rich, and connected elite class–assuming William F. Buckley’s posture of peering down his nose at the less so. Democrats have grown weary of not having a war for four years, and have become the white party of grift, personal fear, excess, extortion, war, and racism. It is evident and as the color of the country changes more toward brown, and when the increasing amount of brown folks die in more undeclared and unconstitutional wars, the twilight of the Democratic party will slip into night, and history. Unlike Libya, Joe Biden will not be able to use the US military for a mob-style shakedown without it being plainly evident. Welcome the orange-man pheonix.

    3. Right – typical left wing nonsense – blame others for your own mistakes.

      Mailin voting has a long and well earned reputation for Fraud.

      I have zero problem with the courts deciding that all mailing ballots are spoiled and illegal – atleast in states without legislation authorizing them.

      Mailin ballots are a very bad idea.

      All of us are seeing exactly why right now.

      Trump is correct – mailin ballot fraud has been found in many elections – Democrats invalidated 20% of the votes in their own primaries.

      Why did you think the general election would go better.

      “Such comments are worrisome not just because of their short-term impact on the voting procedures, but because they appear to lay the groundwork for a challenge to the results themselves, particularly if a close loss”:

      That is correct – when you conduct a fraud prone election and then deliberately do not follow even the few rules to minimize fraud – you can expect the outcome to be constested.

      You seem to think you are entitled to a presumption of legitamcy no matter how many rules you break or home many norms you violate.

      You seem to think that any means that assures the outcome you want is acceptable.

      You rant about popular votes for President – that requires a constitutional change you are highly unlikely to get.

      A far better fix is to completely eliminate mail-in voting, early voting, and to require voter ID.

      It is not the ease with which people can vote that is critical in an election – it is the trustworthyness of the outcome.

      You have not won an election – until people TRUST the results.

      “Hillary kept talking about she’s going to accept, and they never accepted it. You know. She lost, too. She lost good,” he said, ignoring that Clinton conceded decisively the day after the 2016 election.”

      That is correct – Clinton did not raise claim of actual voting fraud. She raised nonsense claims that were irrlevant.

      She did not go to court – because she would have been laughed out of court.

      “Those of us outside the rightwing bubble saw countless stories like the above in mainstream media.”

      Are you clueless – it has been the RIGHT that has been warning for months that mailin voting was going to prove to be a disaster – and it has. You are ranting and trying to blame the messenger.

      If you did not want this kind of mess – then you should not have imposed mailin voting on people by executive fiat.

      And if you did – then you should have followed the rules. You should have rejected late ballots as required by law.
      You should have rejected ballots without signature matches.
      You should have rejected ballots by dead people or people living out of state.
      You should have allowed the counting to be observed – as required by law.

      In short if you wanted the results of the election to be treated as valid – you should not have behaved like crooks.

      “Trump sabotage of the Postal System was documented in real time.”

      Trump did not sabotage the postal system – and only an idiot would conduct an election that depends on the postal system.

      Again something even the Philedelphia inquirer reported months ago.

      And I love the reference to impeachment – it was obvious at the time that Biden was corrupt – yet in left wingnut world we are not allowed to ask for investigations of corrupt politicians – unless they are republicans.

      And today we find that it is possible that VP Joe Biden was taking payoffs in return for the abuse of his vice presidential powers.

      And you still want to mention that Trump was impeached for asking that be investigated ?

      Only in left wingnut land do you impeach the president for asking for an investigation into clear political corruption – and they ELECT the corrupt politician president.

      And you wonder why no one trusts you ?

      Though there is evidence of misconduct – even without evidence – the left is so corrupt that sane people would assume corruption.

      So you understand you are playing with fire ? When you refuse to abid by the rule of law, when all your actions are corupt and done with the force of government – the only remedy left is revolution.

  10. “Some of these challenges are based on the resistance to monitors and observers in states like Pennsylvania. It is mystifying why Pennsylvania is fighting so hard against such access.”

    Seriously? I’d say you are the only person in the US that’s “mystified” by why they refuse to allow Republicans to monitor vote counting.

    Of course, there are plenty of people who will *claim* to be mystified by it, but It’s really just that they don’t want to admit they know exactly what’s going on…maybe you are one of those?

    1. Of course we know why they do not allow republicans in to monitor the vote – it is really hard to commit fraud when you are being observed.

      Regardless you fail to grasp the LAW requires permitting observers by both parties.

      They are violating the law.

  11. LMAO. Biden supporters in Philly are dancing in the street to the Trump 2020 campaign theme song YMCA.

  12. If you don’t like what you see, there’s a place where a strongman can jail his political opponents, a place where his word is law, a place where he can be the leader for life. There’s even a place where he can declare what his citizens can read or see. A place where he can have an election and already know the results. A place where he loves absolute power and can use his government for personal riches. A place where his government workers declare their loyalty to him above anything else. And just so you can be really proud of him, he releases photo-ops of himself on horseback and with no shirt on. That’s right, if you love Trump then you are really going to love Putin.

    1. “there’s a place where a strongman can jail his political opponents”

      Yes there is. It’s known as mainland China.

  13. Hopefully when the House invokes the 25th the Senate say no, requiring Biden to resign as the President. Better a Anemone President than a Socialist.

  14. Step the f&*k up, Turley.

    The lobby that pays you did really well in this election. Lindsey Graham survived as did McConnell. You’ll be paid by an interest that can afford pulling back from conspiracy theory over voting irregularity since, not for lack of trying to find it, Repubs dating back to Trump’s commission early on disbanded due to not finding it.

    Wake up, Jon.

    1. Not a Graham or McConnell fan.

      Regardless they were not relected by lobby’s. They were re-elected by the voters in their states.

      Both faced purportedly excellent opponents.
      Both were outspent by a factor of 2 or more.
      Both opponents were funded by those plotocrats you so worry about from outside their state.

      And yet they still won – decisively. If you think that was for any reason beyond the satisfaction of their voters – you are an idiot.

      I do not have to like either to recognize that you are clueless.

  15. ” I called for Congress to use federal funding to force uniformity in election laws and standards. ”

    How about using a positive approach and not the liberal negative approach. Federal government action should not “force” anything on states that the constitution guarantees to the states. How about federal funding assistance to states that meet certain guidelines acceptable to both part.

    1. Yes, more assistance, more money, and guidelines never makes a difference with politicians. Once a public official, in any party , breaks with the reality that got him or her elected, they are lost forever. Corruption, self-agrandisement, money and winning at all costs is chosen over serving the people and the country. We allow them to rule in perpetuity; we worry about terms for president, and we stop. We have to look at Nancy Pelosi forever? Please, NO! . Congress has too many spoiled fruit. There has to be TERM LIMITS FOR ALL OF THEM.
      Civil service does not exist anymore. With the corruption and wasted time some of these people in Congress freely show us, the American People need to get rid of ALL the bad apples.

    2. The constitution delegates federal elections to the state legislatures – not the states, and congress.

      While it is arguable that congress should stay out of the election of senators and representatives.
      The election of the president is a matter that every single voter has an interest in – it is a federal matter.

      And congress can not regulate presidential elections without the result being regulating senate and representative elections.

      1. I did not say the feds should regulate. I dont want them regulating my shitter, let alone my states voting policies. But they can play a role by bringing together individuals that could provide a handful of various voting processes and if states adopted those, the the feds would fund part of the election expenses for a limited number of years. And if a few are better than others, additional funding for changing to a better alternative could happen.

        No force, no infringing on constitutional authority.

        1. Ron, while states should be free to do as they please regarding all other elections – the election of federal offices – particularly the president are a legitimate national and therefore federal issue.

          The constitution delegated the authority over federal elections to state legislatures and congress – not state governors, or state courts, or state constitutions.

          One of the things missed regarding the constitution is that it does NOT presume that government and political processes are free from corruption – it presumes that by creating competing interest groups that political corruption will essentially self cancel.

          You have complained about gerrymandering in the past.

          In fact gerrymandering has very limited impact nationally – or even statewide. It is obviously practiced, but adding more than 1-2 seats to your party in a large state risks losing dozens to small shifts in voting.

          I do not mostly care about gerrymandering – but I do care alot about corrupting out courts by dragging them into the political process.

          The 2000 Bush/Gore election was both a disaster and an unheaded warning. We fixed all the wrong and none of the right things post 2000.
          Now we are seeing a mess that could prove far larger.

          Securing elections is not that hard. That we can not do so implies strongly there is significant benefit to some to the flaws.

    1. Mespo –

      No, Biden didn’t need to campaign. Just keep those Ryder trucks full of ballots ready to roll. The Democrat cartel has done more damage to the country than Timothy McVeigh did.

    2. It’s always been clear that the best strategy was to let an unequivocal b hole be himself in public was tactically sound.

    3. Mespo, I’m wondering when you’ll own your promises of a Trump win here over the last 6 months.

      How does anyone take you seriously again (not that many of us ever did)?

      1. I do not know what Mespo promised – though I have reason to doubt you as you are making false claims about what i have said.

        At the same time, it would be very unwise for anyone on the left to be crowing – even if Trump decides not to fight this.

        Absent illegitimate mail in elections – a likely healthy does of fraud, the blatant bias of he media, the censorship of social media, it is pretty clear Biden would have lost – likely significanty.

        And it is still possible that he will

  16. So now we know what Pelosi meant when she said “No matter what the vote Biden will win.”

    1. Did you dream her saying that?

      Google says –
      No results found for “No matter what the vote Biden will win.”

        1. Google wasn’t hiding anything. Young just gave a pretend quote. Thanks for the real quote. There are plenty of Google results for that. Big whoop that she expressed confidence that Biden would win. That’s like Kayleigh McEnany saying that Trump would win. She said he’d win in a landslide.

          1. The implication of Pelosi’s statement is that the actual vote and count did not matter.

            You have made all kinds of accusations against Trump for far less consequential statements.

            1. John, you regularly put your own interpretations in other people’s mouths. Yech, eww.

              1. “John, you regularly put your own interpretations in other people’s mouths. Yech, eww.”

                Nope. I take personal responsibility for what I write.

                There is no question what words pelosi spoke
                You are free to decide that they mean something different than she said.
                I am free to read them as written.

                Regardless, this is not especially consequential – except to note that in leftopia it is necescary to bend the words of both your heros and your villians to get them to mean what you want, rather than what they said.

                Personally I think Pelosi merely mis-spoke.
                The alternative is she mistakenly said the quiet part out loud.

  17. Election integrity is everything. If there is doubt there is no reason to respect government or consider it a fair representative republic.
    These issues ever since the Al Gore fiasco always appear in democrat districts. They are playing with fire that can destroy the nation.

    1. This is Bush V. Gore on steriods.

      There is no good outcome from this.

      If people can not trust the result of elections – the government itself is illegitimate and violence is justified.

      We saw left wing violence after 2016 because many on the left felt without evidence they had somehow been duped.

      Why do you expect better from Trump voters – who have far better reason to beleive the left is cheating.

      The left has not cared about facts or truth since Trump was elected – why should anyone beleive they do so now ?

      If you have not behaved trust worthy in 4 years – why should anyone trust you now ?

  18. So no more foreign interference in our elections, right, as long as a Democrat wins?

Comments are closed.