The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on April 13, 2021, 06:55:21 AM
-
Virginia Shuts Down Elections Site Ahead of Key Republican Deadline
Voters left unable to register for convention due to 'scheduled maintenance'
https://freebeacon.com/politics/virginia-shuts-down-elections-site-ahead-of-key-republican-deadline-on-key-republican-deadline/
They're going to keep stealing elections while smirking in our faces, daring us to do anything about it. What are you going to do? Go to court? Argue your case all the way to the Supreme Court?
-
which side is pushing for voter suppression?
-
I completely fail to understand why the VA Republican Party has to structure its own convention (signup, registration, whatever) through the Dem-controlled Department of Elections. Just because they're going to nominate a few candidates? That's not the same thing as an election.
Along with this scenario being completely ridiculous, the idea that the Dems play by gentlemen's rules is simply wrong. Republicans in Virginia should be looking at what else the Dems control that belongs to the Republicans. (Not much, I'm sure, but hell -- it's THEIR convention, not the Dems'.)
Am I missing anything here? :o
-
We're still in the nether zone of if there'll ever be free elections anywhere anymore, starting this year.
The only thing we can do is 'fight' the battles we encounter, ourselves... knowing that millions of GOP/Indies are doing the same thing with the battles they encounter.
-
I completely fail to understand why the VA Republican Party has to structure its own convention (signup, registration, whatever) through the Dem-controlled Department of Elections. Just because they're going to nominate a few candidates? That's not the same thing as an election.
Because, if they don't, the corrupt Democrats will say, "You did not do this through official channels so your candidates do not qualify for the upcoming ballot."
Don't believe me?
Courts: (before the election) "You can't challenge this election rule because you have not suffered harm."
Courts: (after the election) "You can't challenge this rule because the matter has already been decided by the election."
-
Because, if they don't, the corrupt Democrats will say, "You did not do this through official channels so your candidates do not qualify for the upcoming ballot."
Don't believe me?
Courts: (before the election) "You can't challenge this election rule because you have not suffered harm."
Courts: (after the election) "You can't challenge this rule because the matter has already been decided by the election."
You're missing the point. Why would the Republicans, when organizing THEIR OWN convention, have to kowtow to the Commonwealth of Virginia's Department of Elections? What does a CONVENTION have to do with an actual ELECTION?
Sure, they're selecting their candydates. But that's it. That's not an election.
This is a classic example of the Repubs shooting themselves in the kneecap, if, in fact, they allowed this system to happen. State bureaucracies don't normally set themselves up without some kind of legislative action (meaning both parties). Though since Northam's been in office that may have changed.
-
You're missing the point. Why would the Republicans, when organizing THEIR OWN convention, have to kowtow to the Commonwealth of Virginia's Department of Elections? What does a CONVENTION have to do with an actual ELECTION?
Sure, they're selecting their candydates. But that's it. That's not an election.
This is a classic example of the Repubs shooting themselves in the kneecap, if, in fact, they allowed this system to happen. State bureaucracies don't normally set themselves up without some kind of legislative action (meaning both parties). Though since Northam's been in office that may have changed.
I understood you, and it's a fair point; but the process is controlled.
Playing devil's advocate: "Of course you have to go through us. If you don't than any group of people, no matter how small, can claim to be a political party and have their candidates put on the ballot. IT'D BE ELECTORAL CHAOS!"
Establishment republicans have just as much incentive to squeeze-out competitors so they played along election after election. Now it's biting them in the ass.
-
I understood you, and it's a fair point; but the process is controlled.
Obviously. Question is, why are the Dems controlling that process? Just because they can in a now-blue commonwealth?
Playing devil's advocate: "Of course you have to go through us. If you don't than any group of people, no matter how small, can claim to be a political party and have their candidates put on the ballot. IT'D BE ELECTORAL CHAOS!"
Ah, but this is where it gets interesting. Who gives a **** how many political parties are on the ballot? Does that mean we go from a one-page ballot to a two-page ballot because we now have the LGBGTXYZ Party and the Chrysanthemum Party who manage to jump through the many hoops that are already embedded in the process in order to stave off the "electoral college chaos" to which you refer?
Oh, the horrors! :whatever:
Establishment republicans have just as much incentive to squeeze-out competitors so they played along election after election. Now it's biting them in the ass.
Yep. You'd think Mittens and the Cheneys and McConnells could actually figure out that this is political war. You can't play nice with those people. They'll **** you in the ass every time.
-
Ah, but this is where it gets interesting. Who gives a **** how many political parties are on the ballot? Does that mean we go from a one-page ballot to a two-page ballot because we now have the LGBGTXYZ Party and the Chrysanthemum Party who manage to jump through the many hoops that are already embedded in the process in order to stave off the "electoral college chaos" to which you refer?
I would love to see more parties that actually have an effect on elections. But the only thing R's and D's agree on is that more parties are bad for them, so they both work to make it difficult for those parties or independents to make head way, particularly on the presidential front.
-
I would love to see more parties that actually have an effect on elections. But the only thing R's and D's agree on is that more parties are bad for them, so they both work to make it difficult for those parties or independents to make head way, particularly on the presidential front.
R's and D's also agree on attaining and keeping power AND spending our money.
R's used to be more thrifty than D's, but I think that's been out the window for at least 2-3 decades now.
Yeah, our system is set up on a two-party system. Anything else would require a "coalition" which doesn't work in our system, but does work in Europe -- somewhat. NOT that I'm suggesting anything along those lines. I'm just disgusted at how corrupt both parties have gotten to be.