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.
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.
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.
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.
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"
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.
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