Election denying Wisconsin Republicans fire state election official

[EatTheRich]

Yup. Which is why they resort to crimes and democracy suppression. Their agenda is unpopular. They cannot win by adhering to the law and respecting democratic rights. So they must resort to violence, threats, intimidation, etc.

This is the ruling class's modern-day version of "checks and balances"--until a turning point tips us from a largely democratic system into an openly dictatorial one.

 

[EatTheRich]

Yeah, he knows what he’s doing. Cheating the voters by rigging the election maps. Vote is 50-50 Republicans control 66% or Senate and Assembly. He should be taken out and horsewhipped in public. Now he is trying to mp each a judge who was voted in with 55% of the vote in order to keep crooked minority rule in place. What a piece of shit this guy and the minority who support him are.

Horsewhipped? He should be treated with revolutionary legality and revolutionary decorum while he and the ruling class he represents are outmaneuvered politically. Including by refusing to invite the further brutalization of law enforcement.

 

[EatTheRich]

Voss hasn't been rigging the maps. In fact, Evers tried to redraw the electoral maps and found that anything he came up with was illegal per the state constitution. Democrats have been trying to steal redistricting powers from the legislature ever since Evers got into office.

Protasiewicz ran on calling the Wisconsin electoral maps corrupt, and now she refuses to recuse herself when an issue on the maps is coming before the Supreme Court. She's a hack and should be removed.

So only those who acquiesce silently in the corruption should be allowed to address it?

 

[middleview]

Really? So you know Wisconsin law AND you have seen the maps and know case law? Your mother must be so proud.

The constitution specifically places the drawing of maps on the legislature. Any attempt at changing that from the bench is nothing but activism.

Defending gerry mandering if it makes for a republican dictatorship is what I'd expect from you.

 

[Colorforms]

So only those who acquiesce silently in the corruption should be allowed to address it?

Those who can treat a case without bias should be allowed to rule on it. Protasiewicz ran on her biases. As such, she can't be trusted to make objective decisions.

 

[middleview]

Those who can treat a case without bias should be allowed to rule on it. Protasiewicz ran on her biases. As such, she can't be trusted to make objective decisions.

So anyone with an opinion is unable to change that opinion based on the evidence? Good luck finding someone completely uninformed on an issue.

Should the judges appointed by Trump to the Supreme Court have been allowed to rule on Roe v Wade?

 

[EatTheRich]

Those who can treat a case without bias should be allowed to rule on it. Protasiewicz ran on her biases. As such, she can't be trusted to make objective decisions.

No, she ran on opposing blatant corruption, and was elected with a mandate to do so by a comfortable majority.

 

[EatTheRich]

So anyone with an opinion is unable to change that opinion based on the evidence? Good luck finding someone completely uninformed on an issue.

Should the judges appointed by Trump to the Supreme Court have been allowed to rule on Roe v Wade?

Or the cases involving Trump's legal affairs?

 

[Colorforms]

No, she ran on opposing blatant corruption, and was elected with a mandate to do so by a comfortable majority.

No, she ran on claiming the maps were corrupt. She shouldn't have the ability to rule on a case if she is pre-programmed. That just makes her a leftie activist.

 

[middleview]

No, she ran on claiming the maps were corrupt. She shouldn't have the ability to rule on a case if she is pre-programmed. That just makes her a leftie activist.

Or maybe she looked at the maps and decided it was an extreme case of gerry mandering...

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

No, she ran on claiming the maps were corrupt. She shouldn't have the ability to rule on a case if she is pre-programmed. That just makes her a leftie activist.

Should right wing justices who support such gerrymandering be allowed to stay in office and rule on such cases?

 

[EatTheRich]

No, she ran on claiming the maps were corrupt. She shouldn't have the ability to rule on a case if she is pre-programmed. That just makes her a leftie activist.

She ran on pointing out how manifestly corrupt they were, and was elected because the majority of voters wanted a fairer election system.

 

[sensible don]

That's not going to happen any time soon. Republicans have held the legislature for decades. Robert Voss knows what he's doing.

So he is a great cheater and you seem proud of that fact...............wonderful !

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

So he is a great cheater and you seem proud of that fact...............wonderful !

A fine illustration of the maxim that cultists are fine with all types of skulduggery as long as the cult benefits. If they have to take anti-democratic actions to advance the GOP cult they are fine with that. The GOP cult is far more important to them than having a democratic nation.

 

[sensible don]

Or the cases involving Trump's legal affairs?

Well there is the matter of a few conservative justices being bought and sold isn't there.......hey paying for a judges illegitimate son's high $ education happens all the time ? amiright?

 

[sensible don]

A fine illustration of the maxim that cultists are fine with all types of skulduggery as long as the cult benefits. If they have to take anti-democratic actions to advance the GOP cult they are fine with that. The GOP cult is far more important to them than having a democratic nation.

Orange through and through ! Only the BEST BRAINWASHING over there.

 

[Colorforms]

Should right wing justices who support such gerrymandering be allowed to stay in office and rule on such cases?

I think that whether something is gerrymandered or not should be ruled upon by people who haven't already decided that the maps are gerrymandered. It's called being objective, something the leftie press gave up long ago.

 

[Colorforms]

She ran on pointing out how manifestly corrupt they were, and was elected because the majority of voters wanted a fairer election system.

So in a trial to determine whether the maps are corrupt or not, she should not be allowed to rule on it because she already made up her mind and has proven to be bias.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

I think that whether something is gerrymandered or not should be ruled upon by people who haven't already decided that the maps are gerrymandered. It's called being objective, something the leftie press gave up long ago.

Your pathetic dodge is noted. Standard fare from the deplorables.

 

[Colorforms]

So he is a great cheater and you seem proud of that fact...............wonderful !

lol just like the democrats who cheated Biden into office? No, not nearly.