politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Jesus christ you get the form straight from the secretary of state and youre gonna call them stupid for thinking its valid? This is obvious sabotage, how can you have no criticism of the secretary, the person in charge of running the election, for handing out bogus forms.
As the judge said: they didn't read the packet, which CLEARLY shows the form, form type, fields noting the form...etc.
They fucked up.
Do you have the packet to see? I want to see whats so clear about it being invalid
Did you not read the ruling?
Ive only seen articles on the ruling. Link me to the packet please
Nobody needs to provide you with proof. You're some random commentor on the Internet. The Nevada Supreme Court reviewed all the material and made a ruling. Done deal.
Since you are lazy though: https://www.lawdork.com/p/green-party-nevada-scotus
Yeah, claims need proof. In all caps you're claiming the packet they received is CLEARLY invalid. I dont think you've seen it either to be able to make that claim. That link is just another article on the ruling, not the packet they received.
It's not me making a claim. You have no idea what you're talking about 😂
This is a court case that has been out there and decided. The ruling is in. Proof was presented at a fucking trial, where evidence is submitted and reviewed. This isn't MY opinion, it is the opinion of the Nevada Supreme Court.
Well if you had the proof you would have taken your easy victory already, since you seem firmly against backing up your claims im just gonna cut out, reinforced in my belief that this court decision was coordinated democratic sabotage.
Are you allowed to be out of your holding cell?
It went through FOUR courts, and all of them said the same thing. Your position again is that EVERYONE else fucked up here?
You asked for forms, they are right there. You asked for proof, it's right there. What in the fuck is your damage that you can't deal with reality?
The forms are not there
Well they are, because the ruling references. So does the article. Then the linked articles. Do you're just incapable of reading and following links?
Nothing links to a form of any kind
If you seriously can't read the screenshot you were sent, and can't follow the insane number of links from the article you were sent, you might be unfit for society.
I'm sorry you're so incapable.
I think youre mistaking images of the court ruling as images of the forms referenced in the ruling.
Everyone is downvoting you for a reason. Get with reality.