scotticusphd

scotticusphd t1_ismil4p wrote

Do you have a critique of the article or just more dumb posturing? I'm still hearing irrelevant posturing.

Not sure why you're bent out of shape about a new local news site.. most people welcome local journalism, up until you hear something that upsets you.

2

scotticusphd t1_isloo5d wrote

Bringing up website quality in lieu of the substance of the message is losing the forest for the trees. Holding Trump's website up as an example, given that he's a fraud under several criminal investigations, say a lot about your shallow values.

1

scotticusphd t1_is2dkzx wrote

The voting rights act constrained what legislatures could do to curtail equal voting protections for our citizens. To suggest that this type of regulation isn't possible stands in the face of hundreds of years of precedent.

The constitution also holds up the judiciary as a co-equal branch to legislatures that can hold them in check if they step on the constitutionally-protected rights of our citizens. Discarding someone's vote because of a clerical error, when a postmark fulfills the intent and purpose of the hand-written date is fucking stupid, and suggests that dogmatic reading of one part of the constitution is somehow more important than an individual's, or in this case hundreds of individuals' right to vote.

1

scotticusphd t1_is0733c wrote

>Have absentee ballots been used for fraud in numerous previous elections? Absolutely.

Really? Name 3 that have occurred in the past 10 years.

There's no evidence of widespread fraud, certainly none occurring on the scale that would change the results of an election.

1