Good news from Pennsylvania

[sid]

A Pa State judge just ruled in favor of Trump that a state official broke the law when he extended the voting deadline by several days.

This is a big win for us because it will help to exclude many of these illegal mail-in ballots. Check it out:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pennsylvania-court-secretary-of-state-changed-deadline

[togor]

Curious as to the number of ballots at issue. However, penalizing people who followed the instructions they were given at the time by throwing out their vote is not necessarily the wisest course. Sid of course wants Biden votes to be thrown out and doesn't care how it is done, but the same Sid would howl at the unfairness of it all if for some reason it was an excess of Trump votes. One advantage of having no principles except "win" is that you don't have to think about things, just react to them as the gut dictates.

[lyman]

Curious as to the number of ballots at issue. However, penalizing people who followed the instructions they were given at the time by throwing out their vote is not necessarily the wisest course. Sid of course wants Biden votes to be thrown out and doesn't care how it is done, but the same Sid would howl at the unfairness of it all if for some reason it was an excess of Trump votes. One advantage of having no principles except "win" is that you don't have to think about things, just react to them as the gut dictates.

your editorializations lately could be construed as hate speech, and not very inclusive, in a woke society, something to ponder



however, to what sid is saying , this is a good thing, regardless of the candidates involved, or the margins,


fraud is fraud, period,


you only seem to care when you post about it by R's,,,

[togor]

Why is it fraud for a voter to follow the instructions they are given? If a judge rules that the instructions were improper, after the election, that would appear to apply going forward, yes?

[lyman]

the voter is not the issue, it is the time frame that the votes were taken

if the state violated fed law, would the state not be liable for the action, and have to discount or take off the votes?

oops my bad is not a legal defense, and those votes after the deadline removed,

it's a legal thing, so legal stuff happens, you know,, the law,


besides, if it was only Trump votes you would be ok with it , right?

[Roadkingtrax]

> These ballots had been segregated pending the judge’s decision and have not yet been counted, so their disqualification will not affect the current vote count in Pennsylvania.

A Pa State judge just ruled in favor of Trump that a state official broke the law when he extended the voting deadline by several days.

This is a big win for us because it will help to exclude many of these illegal mail-in ballots. Check it out:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pen...anged-deadline

So much for a big win?

[lyman]

> These ballots had been segregated pending the judge’s decision and have not yet been counted, so their disqualification will not affect the current vote count in Pennsylvania.



So much for a big win?

it's a win for all actually, as in the law was followed,

unless, you know, feelings

[Roadkingtrax]

it's a win for all actually, as in the law was followed,

unless, you know, feelings

That would depend on Sid.

[togor]

the voter is not the issue, it is the time frame that the votes were taken

if the state violated fed law, would the state not be liable for the action, and have to discount or take off the votes?

oops my bad is not a legal defense, and those votes after the deadline removed,

it's a legal thing, so legal stuff happens, you know,, the law,


besides, if it was only Trump votes you would be ok with it , right?

The question is....what policy was in effect at the time? And can the policy be changed retroactively?

[lyman]

The question is....what policy was in effect at the time? And can the policy be changed retroactively?

not a lawyer, but I am an IHG member and stay at Holiday Inn's a lot,

the policy in question, as in the LAW, has been in effect for years,
the change was apparently made by someone at State level, when this is a Fed Level law, correct?

so I would say with confidence, and again not a lawyer, in this instance yes, the change was a basically eliminated