There is a non-trivial chance that we'll know for a fact after the election that its outcome was decided by a judge-made remedy that replaced a written rule of law passed by a legislature. In PA, it appears for now that the late-mailed ballots are to be held separately.
-
-
Show this thread
-
This cannot be a healthy outcome for our system.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The GOP only sues to enforce such rules when it means fewer ballots counted. That's not a coincidence at all.

- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Source? Inner voices and radio transmissions you pick up in your fillings are not admissible.
-
He's primarily referring to the SCOTUS Wisconsin decision, which held that if they wanted votes to be counted even if the mail couldn't get there in time, the legislature should have acted to make that explicitly law before the election, rather than the courts. It's contentious.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
David is smart enough to know this. But that doesn’t pay the bills.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The question is why the GOP assumes that more voters is instantly bad for their electoral chances.
-
They don't. They're worried that Democrats will "miraculously" have a bunch of late mail-in ballots show up in places where they're losing, but not by much.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
