229
submitted 3 months ago by Wilshire@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Drusas@kbin.run 109 points 3 months ago

Charge them with election interference.

[-] whotookkarl@lemmy.world 68 points 3 months ago

Anyone who feels the freedom to fuck with our elections or disenfranchise voters should have the book thrown at them, maximum penalties under the statutes.

[-] Adalast@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

I would potentially settled for letting us throw books at them. These people are so fond of their book that tells them to stone people, let's start using hardback copies of it to give them a visceral history lesson.

[-] PseudorandomNoise@lemmy.world 97 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The local vote, which was eventually certified under pressure from state officials...

and further down:

"The Constitution and Michigan Election Law do not authorize boards of county canvassers to refuse to certify election results based on claims made by third parties of alleged election irregularities, or a general desire to conduct election investigations," the letter says. Failure to certify would mean that the clerk would have to personally deliver all records including ballots and voting machines to Michigan state canvassers — all at the county's own expense. The price tag, the letter adds pointedly, will be "expansive."

Spoiler alert. It's all fun and games until you actually have to put in work. Shouting random crap you read off Facebook doesn't work in the real world.

[-] Wilshire@lemmy.world 44 points 3 months ago

The price tag, the letter adds pointedly, will be “expansive."

I read that as "expensive", with a country twang.

[-] just_another_person@lemmy.world 40 points 3 months ago

Jail. Put their asses in jail.

[-] comador@lemmy.world 17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Get your 5G tinfoil caps boys...

"These anti-democracy groups are taking these steps because they want to discredit the election if they lose."

/facepalm

[-] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 5 points 3 months ago

Sorry, am I confused about what you are saying? Because it seems like you are being snarky about the idea that the Republican party will not do what it has been doing and loudly announcing it will continue to do since 2020. Really, trump started in 2016, but he did actually win that one electorally.

Am I misunderstanding you?

[-] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Given comment history, I'd like ro think it was just poorly phrased. But it's also a quote from the article. Soooo not sure anymore.

[-] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 7 points 3 months ago

It's a good thing we Punished People REALLY REALLY HARSHLY who did this last time to Deter future behavior!

this post was submitted on 20 May 2024
229 points (100.0% liked)

politics

18789 readers
2415 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS