North Carolina Republicans decide that only Republican votes count.

[Anonymous]

First(?) official ruling by Republicans in power they Democratic votes must not be counted if they are over 50% of the total.

This is what fascist tyranny looks like.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/04/bush-v-gore-supreme-court-ruling-north-carolina-election.html

[Anonymous]

That's crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
First(?) official ruling by Republicans in power they Democratic votes must not be counted if they are over 50% of the total.

This is what fascist tyranny looks like.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/04/bush-v-gore-supreme-court-ruling-north-carolina-election.html

Reread the article, liar.

[Anonymous]

NC resident here.

This whole thing is a shitshow.

[Anonymous]

They have eliminated 260 votes so far and many have been documented to be legal and valid votes. IOW, the GOP is stealing the election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
First(?) official ruling by Republicans in power they Democratic votes must not be counted if they are over 50% of the total.

This is what fascist tyranny looks like.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/04/bush-v-gore-supreme-court-ruling-north-carolina-election.html

Reread the article, liar.

DP. They wan take disenfranchise 60000 overseas/military votes that were cast in November 2024, and retroactively apply new rules that didn't exist then such as must show a passport picture or drivers license (or something like that). So even if vote was valid then, it might not end counted now if the voter can't produce the documentation within 30 days.

Also this applies only to some counties -- why?

'The constitutional problems with the court-ordered redo are deadly serious and risk election subversion. To begin with, changing the rules for ballot eligibility after the fact violates the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
First(?) official ruling by Republicans in power they Democratic votes must not be counted if they are over 50% of the total.

This is what fascist tyranny looks like.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/04/bush-v-gore-supreme-court-ruling-north-carolina-election.html

Reread the article, liar.

DP. They wan take disenfranchise 60000 overseas/military votes that were cast in November 2024, and retroactively apply new rules that didn't exist then such as must show a passport picture or drivers license (or something like that). So even if vote was valid then, it might not end counted now if the voter can't produce the documentation within 30 days.

Also this applies only to some counties -- why?

'The constitutional problems with the court-ordered redo are deadly serious and risk election subversion. To begin with, changing the rules for ballot eligibility after the fact violates the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment"

* want to
Not want take!

[Anonymous]

OMG you forgot a salient detail - the Supreme Court candidate is the one challenging it. WTAF!

[Anonymous]

Allison Riggs, the candidate who won the election by a very slim margin, spent most of her career advocating for voting rights, including before SCOTUS. It’s a special kind of hell that she seems likely to end up losing this election through this particularly bonkers and illegal way to disenfranchise voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Allison Riggs, the candidate who won the election by a very slim margin, spent most of her career advocating for voting rights, including before SCOTUS. It’s a special kind of hell that she seems likely to end up losing this election through this particularly bonkers and illegal way to disenfranchise voters.

Reports are suggesting Riggs will won despite the heavy GOP effort to overturn the election.

[Anonymous]

Why must these absentee voters prove their identities?

Identity is proven when you register to vote. Identity is proven when you verify your SSN when requesting the ballot.
Identity is proven when the signature on the ballot has to match the signature on your state issued ID.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why must these absentee voters prove their identities?

Identity is proven when you register to vote. Identity is proven when you verify your SSN when requesting the ballot.
Identity is proven when the signature on the ballot has to match the signature on your state issued ID.

They wanted a little more verification. I feel I could cast a ballot in someone else's name pretty easily with the restrictions you listed, depending on how voter registration is done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why must these absentee voters prove their identities?

Identity is proven when you register to vote. Identity is proven when you verify your SSN when requesting the ballot.
Identity is proven when the signature on the ballot has to match the signature on your state issued ID.

They wanted a little more verification. I feel I could cast a ballot in someone else's name pretty easily with the restrictions you listed, depending on how voter registration is done.

And yet, there is no proof that this is a widespread issue, and ironically, when it has been caught, it has been GOP voters who do it.

[Anonymous]

The flood of drivel from election refusers in this thread really brings the point home. Incoherent frothing whe they are caught red handed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why must these absentee voters prove their identities?

Identity is proven when you register to vote. Identity is proven when you verify your SSN when requesting the ballot.
Identity is proven when the signature on the ballot has to match the signature on your state issued ID.

They wanted a little more verification. I feel I could cast a ballot in someone else's name pretty easily with the restrictions you listed, depending on how voter registration is done.

I think the signature one is the hardest to 'fake' tbh. My dad has dementia. He can no longer sign his name like he did on his license, so he's been unable to vote by absentee ballot over the last election cycle. His dementia isn't so bad right now to where he doesn't know what's going on. He knew the candidates. He knew our President at the time when he voted. He knows who our President is now.

He provided a sample of his current signature for it to be compared to his license signature for ballot verification and the lady at the board of elections office confirmed that his vote wouldn't be certified due to the discrepancies. So, in-person voting it is for him until he's not able to understand the candidates or the purpose of the election.