Ballot harvesting in North Carolina.

Jun 2018
2,818
721
South Dakota
#1
Dems trying to steal another seat in N. Carolina this time. They don't like the ballot harvesting goin on in N. Carolina even tho it's legal there and always has been. Allegations are a Republican is going to be investigated for ballot harvesting. He's ahead by abut 900 votes. Dems are threatening not to seat him unti they get it settled. That's code for "till we figure out a way to win". When a page is taken from the libs playbook and used to win they get really pissy.
Dems threaten not to seat GOP House winner amid ballot harvesting accusations in North Carolina
 
Nov 2005
7,072
1,719
California
#2
Dems trying to steal another seat in N. Carolina this time. They don't like the ballot harvesting goin on in N. Carolina even tho it's legal there and always has been. Allegations are a Republican is going to be investigated for ballot harvesting. He's ahead by abut 900 votes. Dems are threatening not to seat him unti they get it settled. That's code for "till we figure out a way to win". When a page is taken from the libs playbook and used to win they get really pissy.
Dems threaten not to seat GOP House winner amid ballot harvesting accusations in North Carolina
I swear. I know it's not feasible to implement, but I think posters should have to provide proof that they understand their own article that they want to post before they are allowed to post it.

To repeat, you say: "They don't like the ballot harvesting goin on in N. Carolina even tho it's legal there and always has been."
Your article (that you just posted to justify your assessment) CLEARLY states: "But in North Carolina, state law still prohibits anyone other than a voter or a close family member from mailing in or dropping off that voter's ballot."

So did you quote an article that was blatantly wrong? Or did you maybe not understand what "ballot harvesting" was when you made the false claim that it was legal in North Carolina?
Or did you not even read the article and you just said the above red face claim without realizing your article explicitly refutes it?

Here are some simple facts...
1) In the thread on California Ballot Harvesting, not a single Republican who posted and complained about the act demonstrated any knowledge on what that act actually is.

2) North Carolina has ballot harvesting as an illegal act, and as such it should not be allowed.

I invite Repubs to address either of those two points.
My expectation is the usual Repub derailment of the thread...
 
Jun 2018
2,818
721
South Dakota
#3
Sorry about that, I went back and reread it and noted the error. Too late to edit the comment.

On another note, while not legal in N Carolina it now is in Calif. I smell a SCOTUS case. In local elections the states and various counties can virtuall ydo whatever they wish, in the case of electing to a US office the fed does have a say.
 
Nov 2005
7,072
1,719
California
#4
Sorry about that, I went back and reread it and noted the error. Too late to edit the comment.
On another note, while not legal in N Carolina it now is in Calif. I smell a SCOTUS case.
Why?
On what grounds?
Because you don't like ballot harvesting, but fail to recognize it's actually republican hypocrisy to whine about it in California (where it's made legal) but then try to use it to your advantage in North Carolina (where it's illegal) ...


In local elections the states and various counties can virtuall ydo whatever they wish, in the case of electing to a US office the fed does have a say.
And what has the fed "said" that is being violated?

If you don't actually have anything to provide for that, then you are putting forth a blatant request for judicial activism, which Repubs claim to hate but secretly only hate when it's a ruling that doesn't go their way...
 
Jun 2018
2,818
721
South Dakota
#5
Why?
On what grounds?
Because you don't like ballot harvesting, but fail to recognize it's actually republican hypocrisy to whine about it in California (where it's made legal) but then try to use it to your advantage in North Carolina (where it's illegal) ...



And what has the fed "said" that is being violated?

If you don't actually have anything to provide for that, then you are putting forth a blatant request for judicial activism, which Repubs claim to hate but secretly only hate when it's a ruling that doesn't go their way...
Why? Possibly on the same grounds that the justice dept went after states with poll taxes and literacy testing.

Ballot harvesting Calif style is illegal IMO. Selectivly seeking ballots from certain people as is alleged in N Carolina is illegal there and it should no be made legal either.

Your reading comp is suspect isn't it. I didn't say they said anything. I said they do have a say in election to US level offices.

Your comment on judicial activism, which I didn't actually bring up, is comical. You of all people, after 50 plus years of getting the constitution redefined to suit your agenda by packing the courts with liberal judges, should now start whining about judicial activism? BARF!

The idea of the courts being used to return the country to sanity must really chap yer hide eh?
 
Nov 2005
7,072
1,719
California
#6
Why? Possibly on the same grounds that the justice dept went after states with poll taxes and literacy testing.
Care to elaborate because the actual grounds involved are simply not common with ballot harvesting.
Preventing people from voting for unconstitutional reasons is nowhere near the same thing as counting a vote despite some people objecting to the method that vote was collected.


Ballot harvesting Calif style is illegal IMO. Selectivly seeking ballots from certain people as is alleged in N Carolina is illegal there and it should no be made legal either.
Why?
Again, you give no justification.
On what grounds do you declare it illegal?


Your reading comp is suspect isn't it. I didn't say they said anything. I said they do have a say in election to US level offices.
Evidently I need to explain links to you that you haven't even tried to think of...

You said: "On another note, while not legal in N Carolina it now is in Calif. I smell a SCOTUS case."
Also: "...in the case of electing to a US office the fed does have a say. "
To justify those two statements, you need to demonstrate how the feds have actually said something that is applicable to the states.

I already knew you were blindly trying to reach for something when you had nothing. Amusingly, when I challenge that weak spot you try to pretend that I am not understanding your statements.
In order for SCOTUS to get involved, the state has to be doing something that either violates the federal constitution (along 14th amendment rights or similar constitutional application to states) or they violate something in federal law which constitutionally applies to states.
Without that, no SCOTUS case.


Your comment on judicial activism, which I didn't actually bring up, is comical. You of all people, after 50 plus years of getting the constitution redefined to suit your agenda by packing the courts with liberal judges, should now start whining about judicial activism? BARF!
Repubs likewise "get the constitution redefined to suit their agenda" (to use your phrase / logic).
They just refuse to admit it.


The idea of the courts being used to return the country to sanity must really chap yer hide eh?
ROFLMAO!
It's an empty wish on your part.
I note the hypocrisy and recognize your dream will not be fulfilled because the courts habitually require something more than "I don't like this" in order to justify a ruling.
 
Jul 2014
12,440
7,483
massachusetts
#7
Why? Possibly on the same grounds that the justice dept went after states with poll taxes and literacy testing.

Ballot harvesting Calif style is illegal IMO. Selectivly seeking ballots from certain people as is alleged in N Carolina is illegal there and it should no be made legal either.

Your reading comp is suspect isn't it. I didn't say they said anything. I said they do have a say in election to US level offices.

Your comment on judicial activism, which I didn't actually bring up, is comical. You of all people, after 50 plus years of getting the constitution redefined to suit your agenda by packing the courts with liberal judges, should now start whining about judicial activism? BARF!

The idea of the courts being used to return the country to sanity must really chap yer hide eh?
Having worked for a number of campaigns, selectively seeking ballots is called "the ground game".
In the phone banks, we called people identified as supporting our candidate to remind them to vote.
On a canvass we only went to houses where the voter had been identified as preferring our candidate.
In 2012, canvassing in New Hampshire for Obama, the only Romney voter we encountered, was in a trailer park, she, and her 3 kids by three different fathers, was staying with her mother (the trailer owner and an Obama voter).
When you are calling voters to remind them to vote, when you are offering rides to the polls, you aren't required to make an equal effort to get the other side to vote.
Picking up absentee ballots is legal in California, who you contact depends on you, you aren't required to make an effort to collect all the ballots.
In North Carolina, only a close relative is allowed to collect a ballot for mailing. Ballot harvesting is illegal in North Carolina.
It's also how the Republican got more votes than the Democrat...
 
Jun 2018
2,818
721
South Dakota
#8
Picking up absentee ballots is legal in California, who you contact depends on you, you aren't required to make an effort to collect all the ballots.
In North Carolina, only a close relative is allowed to collect a ballot for mailing. Ballot harvesting is illegal in North Carolina.
It's also how the Republican got more votes than the Democrat...
I did the ground game in Calif in two elections in the 60s as a Democrat. It's pretty much as you said except for the cheating that went on wholesale. The point is that ballot harvesting in the Calif model shouldn't be legal period. I don't care who won doing it or who got caught doing it illegally. The opportunity for fraud is multiplied many times.
I'm expecting there will be a Federal court challenge.
 
Nov 2005
7,072
1,719
California
#9
I did the ground game in Calif in two elections in the 60s as a Democrat. It's pretty much as you said except for the cheating that went on wholesale. The point is that ballot harvesting in the Calif model shouldn't be legal period. I don't care who won doing it or who got caught doing it illegally. The opportunity for fraud is multiplied many times.
"Opportunity" for fraud is not the same thing as fraud being committed.
Republicans are eager for voter disenfranchisement. :(


I'm expecting there will be a Federal court challenge.
Again, on what grounds?
Arguing that fraud is potentially more likely is not a federal court justification to overturn a state's choice.
 

Similar Discussions