Anonymous wrote:Holy crap this is malpractice. Those of you questioning why you had always been citizens but needed to reaffirm, this is why. JFC.

Good god. That is a HORRIBLE system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

She had a responsibility to confirm her citizenship with the local registrar within fourteen days of notification. Why didn’t she do so?

Why did the DMV suddenly decide she wasn't a citizen despite having been born and raised here?

Trumpkin’s entire defense is that he is not removing anyone that is entitled to be on the voter rolls that’s why I suggested either he should drop the lawsuit or else stop being governor if it turns out he was wrong.

What’s wrong with a little accountability?

Holy crap this is malpractice. Those of you questioning why you had always been citizens but needed to reaffirm, this is why. JFC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

She had a responsibility to confirm her citizenship with the local registrar within fourteen days of notification. Why didn’t she do so?

Why didn't Youngkin do it during the 640-day period when it was legal?

He wants to grandstand and get a cabinet position in future Trump Admin, and then run for Warner’s seat. Doing this the legal wayis boring. It wouldn’t get him national headlines and the attention and praise of Herr Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

She had a responsibility to confirm her citizenship with the local registrar within fourteen days of notification. Why didn’t she do so?

She was in the hospital on a ventilator due to COVID.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 90 day limit doesn't apply, as it is not a systematic removal of voters. It is removal of people not eligible to vote, never eligible to vote. They are not 'voters'.

The Fourth Circuit found your argument unpersuasive.

Let’s see what SCOTUS says. It’s been appealed as predicted.

Voters have to be reinstated tomorrow cert denied, one sentence, per curium (k though Thomas is just corrupt enough to write a dissent saying that what we really need is blood, from a vein, DNA sequenced at the voting site as proof of citizenship, GATTACA style. Order by COB today. Mark it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

She had a responsibility to confirm her citizenship with the local registrar within fourteen days of notification. Why didn’t she do so?

Why didn't Youngkin do it during the 640-day period when it was legal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 90 day limit doesn't apply, as it is not a systematic removal of voters. It is removal of people not eligible to vote, never eligible to vote. They are not 'voters'.

JFC this is a stupid argument. The limit is there exactly because there are lots of ways to make a mistake and kick someone off who is a citizen. People have talked on this thread about several ways that can happen.

But here’s my deal— we let Youngkin do this and if he makes any mistakes— kicks any citizens off— then he resigns immediately and so does everyone else who participated in this process. Maybe make him pay a $1000 fine to each citizen kicked off too.

Honestly you need to keep up with the news, it’s obvious from your post that you haven’t been following this case, what the legal arguments have been and who is on the list.

Actually I have been and I saw that Youngkin made this argument and it’s stupid for exactly the reason I said.

Saying Youngkin is not barred from kicking people off the registered voter list because they had no right to register assumes the exact issue in question. And because there is some doubt, Congress said states should leave a buffer before election day to sort through the times they did it correctly and the times they screwed up.

Here is another article about a voter who got kicked off by one of these purges despite being a citizen (in this case she is Trump voter who is mad that they kicked her off even though she has “the whitest sounding name possible”)

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/10/29/texas-noncitizen-voter-roll-removal-mary-howard-elley

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 90 day limit doesn't apply, as it is not a systematic removal of voters. It is removal of people not eligible to vote, never eligible to vote. They are not 'voters'.

JFC this is a stupid argument. The limit is there exactly because there are lots of ways to make a mistake and kick someone off who is a citizen. People have talked on this thread about several ways that can happen.

But here’s my deal— we let Youngkin do this and if he makes any mistakes— kicks any citizens off— then he resigns immediately and so does everyone else who participated in this process. Maybe make him pay a $1000 fine to each citizen kicked off too.

Honestly you need to keep up with the news, it’s obvious from your post that you haven’t been following this case, what the legal arguments have been and who is on the list.

Anonymous wrote:

She had a responsibility to confirm her citizenship with the local registrar within fourteen days of notification. Why didn’t she do so?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 90 day limit doesn't apply, as it is not a systematic removal of voters. It is removal of people not eligible to vote, never eligible to vote. They are not 'voters'.

The Fourth Circuit found your argument unpersuasive.

Let’s see what SCOTUS says. It’s been appealed as predicted.

Anonymous wrote:The 90 day limit doesn't apply, as it is not a systematic removal of voters. It is removal of people not eligible to vote, never eligible to vote. They are not 'voters'.

The Fourth Circuit found your argument unpersuasive.