Republicans say the new law is meant to restore integrity in the electoral process, almost a year after former President Trump lost reelection and began spreading disinformation about the results. “One thing that all Texas can agree and that is that we must have trust and confidence in our elections,” Abbott said Tuesday, adding the bill “ensures that every eligible voter will have the opportunity to vote.”
He pointed to provisions of the bill that expand early voting hours during the 12 days prior to an election in which voters can cast their ballots. “Texas provides 12 days of early voting and this law even adds more hours during those early voting days. By comparison, the president’s home state of Delaware provides zero days and zero hours of early voting,” Abbott said. “It ensures that Texas provides even more opportunities for people to engage in the voting process than the president’s home state of Delaware as well as many other states across the entire country.”
This is one of these partisan position statements being passed off as real news. The article actually starts off providing most of the liberal talking points as they would like them explained. You know such as providing that the law gives more authority to partisan poll watchers. This (of course) is in regards to the fact that the left would like everyone to believe that the rest of the poll workers are objective straight shooters with no bias at all. The problem is that there is nothing unconstitutional about having members from "both parties" allowed to watch and oversee the counting. Transparency in this process is a good thing, not an unconstitutional thing.
But talking points don't make lawsuits which is the problem for all of these lawsuits. The courts don't care what rhetoric you choose to use, they generally care much more about the law. Are there some liberal judges out there who will respond to rhetoric? Sure, a sucker is born every minute. But this lawsuit has no chance ultimately in the Texas. The problem is that once you get past the rhetoric and look at the law, the GOP is correct. It actually increases access to the polls while making fraud harder. This is the nightmare scenario for the left. Fair and clean elections with no fake ballots, no double voting, no double counting.
Just vote and count em up fairly? Can't have that. Have to sue!
57 comments:
I'd like same day voting with same day results
It really shouldn't be that hard
If people want mail in let them
Just have them either drop it off or mail in time to receive by election day
And pre-count all those so the total counts are easily available on election day.
Not rocket science
Most of the lawsuits that have failed lately have been Trump's.
"Fair and clean elections with no fake ballots, no double voting, no double counting."
We are FOR that. Republicans are not. Gotta keep blacks and browns from voting.
The current Republican party now the opposition to the Reconstruction process after the civil war and of course the civil rights era. These laws are carefully crafted to suppress turnout among minority voters. The big lie has destroyed the Party of Abraham Lincoln and replaced it the party of Donald Trump.
Democratic Party now civil rights advocate
Regarding the recent letter, “Democrats have history of suppressing Blacks”:
The writer has blurred the lines of the past 193 year history of the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party was founded in 1828. The party split over slavery in 1860. There were two Democratic presidential candidates in 1860, one pro- and one anti-slavery. They split the vote, helping Republican Abraham Lincoln win the election.
In the post-Civil War period many southern Democrats were among those who engaged in activities to suppress Blacks as officeholders and as voters following the end of Reconstruction in 1877. The end came when a deal was cut in the House of Representatives on Feb. 1, 1877, to give the Electoral College vote to Republican Rutherford B. Hayes. Democrat Samuel Tilden had won the popular vote but had come up one vote short in the Electoral College count. The Republicans got the White House, turned their backs on Blacks in the South and ended Reconstruction in 1877. This did allow for those Democratic controlled southern states to un-do the progress that had been made. The suppression, terror and murder continued into the 20th century.
Beginning in 1932, the New Deal coalition forged by Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt brought some southern Democrats, many immigrants and citizens from the other regions of the U.S. together. There were many social and economic improvements for all Americans, delivered by that administration.
The courage of the coalition of legislators working with a southern Democratic president, Lyndon Johnson, to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and then the Voting Rights Act of 1965 gave a huge measure of freedom and birthright withheld to many Americans. It also did something else Johnson predicted, it lost the South to the Democratic Party. Those southern senators and congressmen who had opposed the legislation joined the Republican Party, where they remain. Their successors, at the state legislative level, are the ones today working to change voting procedures in states that switched from Democratic to Republican after ’64 and ’65.
None of them happened in the last election cycle.
fake ballots, no double voting, no double counting.
https://pressofatlanticcity.com/opinion/letters/voice-of-the-people-sept-8-2021/article_1a251bd0-0f4b-11ec-ad07-0b8818eb225a.html
Gotta keep blacks and browns from voting.
It's honestly sad that you believe this.
Funny how when asked, these petitioners are never quite able to find that elusive person who cannot figure out how to vote with nearly two weeks of early voting with expanded hours.
But as it is often stated. A sucker is born every minute!
Someone has to be dumb enough to fall for the rhetoric! Otherwise it would just go away.
These laws are carefully crafted to suppress turnout among minority voters.
Funny how they cannot actually come up with a legitimate argument when they get to court, huh?
Why do you suppose that is.. if, in fact, these laws are carefully crafted to suppress minority voters?
Should be easy enough to prove, huh?
Why do you suppose they fail every time Roger?
This is a textbook example as to why the courts in general and the USSC in particular is so crucial to leftists. And why the packing of the USSC is so appealing and being demanded.
The left simply cannot get any significant want, wish or desire passed via the legislative process - the consent of the actual fucking governed. They must get their shit enacted by judicial fiat. Effectively shoving it up our collective ass with little to no recourse. From Roe to gay marriage, it's the same process every time.
The basis for Roe isn't even law, let along "settled law."
It's a ruling. A ruling we're stuck with until the states decide to codify it into law as NY has done, and to reject the premise by the codification of law as Texas just did.
Funny how they cannot actually come up with a legitimate argument when they get to court, huh?
The fatal conceit of almost every position coming from the left when push comes to legal shove.
I'm with Scalia. Show me where the right to abortion exists within the constitution.
Oh, it's not there?
Fine. Write and pass an abortion law and let us know how that goes. And when that effort fails on a national level, codify it at the state level. Let the blue states have it, and let the red states outlaw it.
Pretty fucking simple.
And if you had the law and the facts and most importantly the PEOPLE on your side, you wouldn't have to rely on plagiarizing the opinions of others.
Gotta keep blacks and browns from voting.
Please point to the specific language that explicitly prohibits "blacks and browns" from voting.
For example again the Lone Star State empowered Republican party members can prosecute people who are trying to certify others who voted against Republicans.
What does the law say about legal penalties?
Texas added new criminal penalties for election officials or others who violate state laws. Republicans say the penalties will deter fraud. Democrats say the measures will penalize people who are trying to help people vote.
For example, the new law bans election officials from sending out absentee voting applications to individuals who didn’t request one, and makes it a felony for any official to violate that prohibition.
The state also requires local election officials to refer cases where ineligible people register to vote or cast ballots to authorities including the state attorney general. Republicans say that is a reasonable security measure. Opponents say such changes will make it too easy to aggressively prosecute people.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/texas-voting-bill-what-you-need-to-know-11630667069
Again vigilantes don't have the constitutional right to arrest anyone
rrb said...
Gotta keep blacks and browns from voting.
Please point to the specific language that explicitly prohibits "blacks and browns" from voting.
obviously no group is excluded
It's a racist argument
and "nobody" believes it anymore
There has never been a time where it was easier to vote
and easier to get ID
scares the hell out of dems
scaring people is how they try and maintain power
but Biden is scaring the hell out of the entire world
except China, Russia and Iran
and some of our smaller enemies
Opponents say such changes will make it too easy to aggressively prosecute people.
So the only thing acceptable to democrats is a complete abandonment of the rule of election law, and the allowance of democrats to use every illegality under the fucking sun. And the rest of Texans just have to suck it up and accept that result.
Democrats are tacitly admitting that they REQUIRE a complete and total abandonment of election INTEGRITY in order to acquire, grow and maintain their political power.
It doesn't get more cynical that that.
Very specially designed voter suppression is designed to reduce turnout in areas where Joe Biden won a vast majority of minority neighborhoods.
What kind of new voting limits are in the law?
Several of the law’s provisions undo expansions introduced last year by Democratic-leaning Harris County, which includes Houston and is the most populous county in the state, to make voting easier during the Covid-19 pandemic. Democratic President Biden won Harris County by about 13 percentage points over Mr. Trump last year.
For example, Harris County offered drive-through voting at some locations, which more than 120,000 voters used, but is banned under the new legislation, except for voters with physical limitations.
A police officer directed motorists to a drive-through voting area in Houston on Nov. 3. The new law largely bans drive-through voting.
Harris County also offered a day of 24-hour voting in some locations, which was aimed at residents who work nontraditional hours, like healthcare workers. The new law regulates the hours when counties can offer early voting, generally between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., which will outlaw a 24-hour voting option.
Even the Republican auditors found zero fraudulent ballots.
Roger Amick said...
For example again the Lone Star State empowered Republican party members can prosecute people who are trying to certify others who voted against Republicans.
What does this word salad even mean ?
And if I can make it out how does anyone know how a person voted ?
If there was a competency test for voting I know of one person who wouldn't be allowed to vote
roger
Roger Amick said...
Very specially designed voter suppression is designed to reduce turnout in areas where Joe Biden won a vast majority of minority neighborhoods.
Who ordered seconds on the salad ?
I specifically used the Wall Street Journal reports because you can't claim fake news robotics..
Again vigilantes don't have the constitutional right to arrest anyone
While citizens arrest is probably a legal option, your histrionic bullshit is lost in a fog of hyperbole.
Instead of arrest, which they may or may not be able to do, they can report such illegal behavior to those charged with the enforcement of state and local election law.
And that's already true most anywhere. For example - Wear your favorite candidates t-shirt to the polls and you SHOULD be thrown the fuck out.
Note the left's common theme where it comes to election law and election integrity ANYWHERE... They vehemently oppose it. They oppose it because they feel ENTITLED to rule.
Several of the law’s provisions undo expansions introduced last year by Democratic-leaning Harris County, which includes Houston and is the most populous county in the state, to make voting easier than before where Democratic President Biden won Harris County by about 13 percentage points over Mr. Trump last year.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
I specifically used the Wall Street Journal reports because you can't claim fake news robotics..
You specifically used the Wall Street Journal reports because you're intellectually incapable of putting forth your own argument.
When you try we get a gibberish word salad complete with croutons and our choice of salad dressing.
You're fucking 70 and confined to a nursing home for chrissakes. Ask an orderly to wheel you out onto the patio for some fresh air.
.
Roger Amick said...
I specifically used the Wall Street Journal reports because you can't claim fake news robotics..
Texas Democrats Suppress the Vote
Blocking democratic proceedings on a bill expanding early voting. What heroes.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/texas-voting-bill-voter-suppression-11626297555
Gee the journal has stories from both sides of the aisle
But if you only use one side guess what?
you are not looking at things from both sides
But with roger's logic democrats are against early voting and are for suppressing the vote.
According to the WSJ so you can't claim fake news robotics
If you see a crime being committed, unless you are under threat, you dial 911.
You don't understand how the law works.
For example, the new law bans election officials from sending out absentee voting applications to individuals who didn’t request one, and makes it a felony for any official to violate that prohibition.
And what, exactly, is your problem with that?
If I did not request a mail in ballot, I certainly do not want any fucking ballots in my name sent out. Especially considering I am currently in the process of moving. Who knows where that ballot might end up and who might decide to send it back.
So... sorry Rog.
But the Democratic Party does not get to decide FOR ME if I am sent an absentee ballot when I don't want or need one. If you disagree about whether or not you want a mail in ballot. So be it! Request one! nobody is stopping you.
This has absolutely NOTHING to do with minority voters.
Yet you bring it up like a child believing that it does because that is what you were told! Like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, these acts of discrimination are true!
Gee the journal has stories from both sides of the aisle
But if you only use one side guess what?
you are not looking at things from both sides
He never does.
That's ALWAYS been a lie.
Not my words Trumpameric..
Several of the law’s provisions undo expansions introduced last year by Democratic-leaning Harris County, which includes Houston and is the most populous county in the state, to make voting easier than before where Democratic President Biden won Harris County by about 13 percentage points over Mr. Trump last year.
A heavily African American county.
If you understood the law, laws can be very carefully crafted to suppress or increase turnout.
But talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.
Karl Rove!!
Is not a journalist. He is a very conservative former chief of staff for George Bush
It was an opinion piece you dumbest troll ever
If I did not request a mail in ballot, I certainly do not want any fucking ballots in my name sent out. Especially considering I am currently in the process of moving. Who knows where that ballot might end up and who might decide to send it back.
Having uncontrolled ballots floating around is a recipe for election fraud.
These one-time measures were put in last year as a health emergency
And in reality they never should have been allowed
Karl Christian Rove is an American Republican political consultant, policy advisor and lobbyist. He was Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff during the George W. Bush administration until his resignation on August 31, 2007.
You can't differentiate between a reporter and an opinion piece.
Roger Amick said...
Karl Rove!!
Is not a journalist. He is a very conservative former chief of staff for George Bush
It was an opinion piece you dumbest troll ever
duh
ROFLMFAO !!!
The End of the Modern World Announced by Traitor Joe.
"Climate change is real. We’re living through it now. We don’t have any more time,” Traitor Joe'
Scott, in effect it will eliminate mail ballots.
Many Republican states have mail ballots, including Utah.
They can prosecut someone who made a mistake!
For example, the new law bans election officials from sending out absentee voting applications to individuals who didn’t request one, and makes it a felony for any official to violate that prohibition.
I deal with people like you every day here.
You probably never had a brain.
Hey roger, here's your WSJ "reporter" before she joined the WSJ and worked for the Daily Beast:
Looks like she is pretty one sided and not unlike Rove but from the other side. But for some reason you are fine with her:
Every Perv Trump Has Ever Defended
GROSS
The Republican nominee was caught on tape 11 years ago describing himself sexually assaulting a woman—and he's not apologizing. It's part of his long history of defending predators.
BETSY SWAN,
ALEXA CORSE
Published Oct. 07, 2016
They’re #NeverTrump but Not Yet #WithHer
ON THE FENCE
They’ll do anything to avoid voting for the Republican Party’s nominee—anything but publicly endorse the other side.
ALEXA CORSE
Published Aug. 18, 2016
All the Republicans Choosing Clinton
THEY’RE WITH HER
Big-name Republicans are increasing ditching their party’s candidate and expressing their support of the Democratic nominee.
ALEXA CORSE
Published Aug. 10, 2016
Trump Campaign Lied About Ukraine Change
RUSSIA’S IN UKRAINE?
Top Trump aide Paul Manafort swore that the campaign had nothing to do with a radical change in the official Republican Party position on Ukraine. He was lying.
ANDREW DESIDERIO,
ALEXA CORSE
Published Jul. 26, 2016
Cory Booker’s Final VP Pitch
TO THE RESCUE
The fresh-faced Senator came to Cleveland as the relief pitcher for the DNC’s anti-hate offensive—oh, and to remind Clinton that he’d be a good vice president.
GIDEON RESNICK,
ALEXA CORSE
Published Jul. 21, 2016
Cruz Humiliates Trump in Prime Time
https://www.thedailybeast.com/author/alexa-corse
For example, the new law bans election officials from sending out absentee voting applications to individuals who didn’t request one, and makes it a felony for any official to violate that prohibition.
What is so hard to grasp about it not being OK to send out ballots to people who didn't request them?
Especially if voter rolls are swollen with ineligible voters
As is the case in many democrat states
It's just a recipe for fraud
If you understood the law, laws can be very carefully crafted to suppress or increase turnout.
Really? How exactly?
If it's explicit, it makes the law unconstitutional and ripe for a court challenge. Yet the fleebagger dems didn't put up any sort of a legal challenge. They simply ran away. If that's what you're forced to resort to, then your legal argument is for shit.
And if Harris County is so overwhelmingly black who vote democrat, then things like drive-thru voting and unsolicited mail in ballots shouldn't be required.
A better question is why the left requires all these advantages and special favors and cannot imagine living without them. For several decades we had an election DAY, as in ONE, and you had to care enough to drag your ass to your polling place. If the sanctity and integrity of our elections meant anything to anyone any more we would've stuck with the old SECURE methods.
Between Scott and I, you're failing at every aspect of debate on this topic, but if you'd like to continue I've got some time before my next meeting.
And seriously alky, just admit that you care nothing about election integrity and security, and admit the fact that you demand and require every sleight of hand advantage to win elections.
This isn't about discrimination because you don't give a fuck about minorities - especially BLACKS - to begin with.
You're about to get yourself a BLACK governor and you simply cannot stand the prospect.
Roger lost yet another debate.
No surprise , it happens 4-5 times a day here.
Always enjoyable to watch.
You're about to get yourself a BLACK governor and you simply cannot stand the prospect.
California sent out ballots to everyone on their voter rolls
And they allow ballot harvesting
With a low turnout election and harvesting it will be real hard to recall a very unpopular governor with democrat operatives fanning out.
Especially with the FAKE NEWS and media "polls" giving them cover (I've seen polls with Newsom winning and losing by double digits...) I loved that the former Hispanic California Senate leader publicly endorsed Elder. Newsom's that unpopular
But it's a very blue state falling into ruin and may not correct its decline
Several of the law’s provisions undo expansions
You do realize Roger that pretty much all of those so called "expansions" were Covid related emergency measures and many of those were eventually found to be unconstitutional according to the courts.
You don't get to say... hey we are going to do this because of emergency and then later say, let's continue to do this even though there is no more emercency.
That is the idea of an emergency measure.
We also had the most fraud, the highest percentage of ballot discrepancies, and the most overall problems in the history of elections. Much of this was due to the fact that Governors and such decided to remove security safeguards in the name of voter access.
As if Covid made it impossible to check signatures (as happened in Michigan and Pennsylvania). Or like Covid meant that people could not be bothered to have ID.
This Vox piece illustrates how the major media will go to very great lengths to avoid stating the following incredibly obvious truth: COVID continues to be a social and economic problem in America because people refuse to get vaccinated. I mean look at this framing:
More than a year and a half into the Covid-19 pandemic, America still doesn’t agree on what it’s trying to accomplish.
Is the goal to completely eradicate Covid-19? Is it to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed? Is it hitting a certain vaccine threshold that mitigates the worst Covid-19 outcomes but doesn’t prevent all infections? Or is it something else entirely?
At the root of this confusion is a big question the US, including policymakers, experts, and the general public, has never been able to answer: How many Covid-19 deaths are too many?
The lack of a clear end goal has hindered America’s anti-pandemic efforts from the start. At first, the goal of restrictions was to “flatten the curve”: to keep the number of cases low enough that hospitals could treat those that did arise. But that consensus crumbled against the reality of the coronavirus — leaving the country with patchwork restrictions and no clear idea of what it meant to “beat” Covid-19, let alone a strategy to achieve a victory.
The vaccines were supposed to be a way out. But between breakthrough infections, the risks of long Covid, and new variants, it’s becoming clear the vaccines didn’t get rid of the need to answer the underlying question of what the Covid-19 endgame is.
This is, not to put too fine a point on it, total bullshit.
If all adults in the US who can get vaccinated were vaccinated against COVID, then COVID would not be a medical or social or economic problem of any kind, full stop. “Breakthrough infections” among the vaccinated do not constitute any such problem, as it’s extremely rare for such infections to lead to serious medical complications. It’s also extremely rare for COVID to lead to serious medical complications in children, and in any event a vaccine for five through eleven year olds will soon be approved.
This whole piece, in other words, needs to pretend that there’s some serious cost-benefit balancing act to perform in regard to masking, social distancing, etc., when the only reason we’re even still engaging in such measures is because PEOPLE CHOOSE NOT TO GET VACCINATED.
And it’s not exactly rocket surgery to figure out how to deal with that problem, either: you just make it increasingly costly to individuals and groups to continue to make that choice, until enough of them aren’t willing to bear that cost, or die of COVID, or some combination.
Piece after piece in the media ignore all this, because recognizing it would require recognizing that, from a public policy standpoint, the solution to the COVID problem is already perfectly well known. What’s not known is the solution to the liberal democracy in America is breaking down because the Republican party has gone fascist problem.
Ultimately this all goes back to fatalism about how you can’t do anything about right wing craziness in this country, so you just have to kludge around it somehow.
I support voter ID, but the Republican party wants to make it very difficult for a lot of Democrats in poor districts.
And again the Sunday Morning church vote day is almost impossible anymore.
Scott, in effect it will eliminate mail ballots.
Fact Check: FALSE.
It merely requires a request to send out a mail in ballot, and provides a subsequent audit trail and tracking for each one requested.
Only a complete fucking asshole hell bent on election fraud wants several million blank ballots mailed out with no corresponding audit/verification/tracking process.
Nope, the reason we are still in this is China/Fauci.
At least get the baseline facts Right , Roger.
"
rrbSeptember 8, 2021 at 10:02 AM
Scott, in effect it will eliminate mail ballots.
Fact Check: FALSE"
Of course Always Wrong Roger is Spectacularly wrong, again.
We , from the center to right side politically use facts.
Roger and James us emotions.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
I support voter ID, but the Republican party wants to make it very difficult for a lot of Democrats in poor districts.
Difficult as in making the Voter ID fucking FREE.
VOX: Days without making complete fools of themselves - ZERO.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
I support voter ID, but the Republican party wants to make it very difficult for a lot of Democrats in poor districts.
Like a good little clone, you just follow Democrat talking points.
Ironically people in poor districts are smarter that you. By a 2 to 1 margin they favor voter ID.
The only thing voter ID makes difficult is for Democrats to cheat and commit election fraud.
See, chaun of custody is an issue for states who think the integrity of the vote is important to public confidence the election was conducted fairly.
Ironically people in poor districts are smarter that you. By a 2 to 1 margin they favor voter ID.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yW2LpFkVfYk
A coalition of voting rights organizations in Texas asked a federal judge on Tuesday to prevent the state from enforcing a sweeping set of controversial new laws that severely restrict the ways Texans can cast a ballot. The measure, SB 1, which was signed into law by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott on Tuesday, bans 24-hour and drive-thru voting while adding new requirements for citizens that wish to cast a ballot by mail, among other restrictions.
Echoing many other GOP officials, Gov. Abbott on Tuesday said the purpose of the bill was to ensure that all Texans “have trust and confidence in our elections,” despite the state seeing its highest voter turnout in nearly 30 years during the 2020 presidential election.
“The bill I’m about to sign helps to achieve that goal,” Abbott said during the special bill signing ceremony. “Election integrity is now law in the state of Texas.”
But the lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, describes the measure as an “omnibus voter suppression bill” whose primary aim is to disenfranchise minority voters and bolster Republican’s power. The state’s demographics—particularly in densely populated cities—have shifted in recent years towards populations that traditionally vote for more Democratic candidates.
“The Legislature enacted SB 1 not to preserve election integrity or combat election fraud—after all, the State’s own election officials have acknowledged that elections in Texas are already secure—but rather to stem the growing tide of minority voter participation by weaponizing the false, repeatedly debunked accusations of widespread voter fraud advanced by supporters of former President Donald Trump during the 2020 presidential election,” Perkins Coie attorney John Hardin wrote in the suit. “It is no coincidence that SB 1 passed just months after Texas Republican Party leaders, including the State’s governor, attorney general, and members of its congressional delegation, tried and failed to overturn the presidential election results and disenfranchise millions of voters in other states.”
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/new-texas-voting-law-weaponizes-debunked-accusations-of-widespread-voter-fraud-lawsuit-says/?utm_source=mostpopular
Lawyers not Scott Johnson schizophrenia
Guess roger thinks there won't be lawyers on the other side taking a different and opposite outlook
ROFLMFAO !!!
The Supreme Court’s decision sends a message to women and girls that it won’t protect their rights and that they can’t be trusted to make the most intimate decisions about their own bodies. And if they can’t be trusted with that decision, what’s next? Nothing says women are second-class citizens like the Texas anti-abortion law.
If the Democrats make it the prime reason to vote against Republicans, the women will save America.
It's basically slavery. The government gains power over their bodies after they have sex with anyone, including their fathers and rapists!
And vigilantes can get their friends sued for $10,000!
The Republicans hate government control over anything but women who get pregnant.
Roger , nice, got your ass handed to you on Voter ID.
Run to pure Emotional topic.
Roger, you haven't had sex with a woman in years, even if you could have no way in hell you could make a baby.
It's basically slavery.
When you have to resort to extraordinary levels hyperbole to stake out your position on a particular topic, you've tacitly admitted that you don't have a valid counter-argument.
The government gains power over their bodies after they have sex with anyone
But you're quite ok with the government gaining power over their bodies with a vaccine mandate.
You see, until liberals develop some level of consistency with their arguments, in this case "my body - my choice" you're never going to be taken seriously and you'll always be considered unserious on every single topic.
Traitor Joe's Policies
".S. Natural Gas Prices Jump 8% On Tight Supply
By Tsvetana Paraskova - Sep 08, 2021, 11:00 AM CDT"
Yep, attacking US Oil/Fracking
Great idea Socialist.
The Republicans hate government control over anything but women who get pregnant.
Republicans have no issue with women getting pregnant, alky.
So that's a lie.
When that fetus develops a heartbeat it becomes a human being, and just because you're an ugly twat from Austin and got drunk and knocked up on a one-nighter, doesn't give you the power of death over another human being.
A dozen condoms is less than 10 bucks in every CVS and Walgreens in the country.
Get some.
But the lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, describes the measure as an “omnibus voter suppression bill” whose primary aim is to disenfranchise minority voters and bolster Republican’s power.
Hyperbole is not a legal argument. And the Democrats once again show their real motivation.
To cheat their way into power.
Post a Comment