Yeah, im talking about Nevada too. What should they have done differently, they even went to the secretary of state to make sure they were doing things right. How many frivolous obstacles do you want to put in the way of letting people vote for someone?
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.
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.
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.
Yeah, im talking about Nevada too. What should they have done differently, they even went to the secretary of state to make sure they were doing things right. How many frivolous obstacles do you want to put in the way of letting people vote for someone?
TLDR: you can’t feign ignorance by actually being stupid because they didn’t read the materials and recognize the form was wrong.
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.