CNN is about to have huge layoffs. I would hope that Jake Tapper would not be among those laid off. But he makes it really hard to defend him when he's offering the same insipid take as FOX "NEWS." This is from Elizabeth Preza's report at RAW STORY:
CNN’s Jake Tapper on Friday shamed a Democratic election board official in Pennsylvania after she voted to willingly violate a Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling regarding undated and misdated ballots in Bucks County, PA.
Bucks County chairman Robert Harviie Jr. and commissioner Diane Marseglia on Tuesday voted against a third colleague to count ballots that were misdated or undated, in defiance of a Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that considered undated ballots “invalid as a matter of law,” Bucks County Courier Times reports.
Pennsylvania is in the middle of an automatic recount for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Bob Casey. The Associated Press has called the race for Republican businessman Dave McCormick, making it one of at least three Senate seats the GOP flipped in 2024. CNN has yet to call the race.
[. . .]
“When you vote provisional in PA, you need to sign the ballot twice,” Cohen explained. “They said, on this board, if it only has one signature, they will allow it. That's in defiance of what the state Supreme Court said before the election. You're really not supposed to defy the Supreme Court, and some of the comments from one of the democratic commissioners have gone absolutely viral on social media for the pretty strong stand that she took.”
I believe Jake Tapper shamed himself.
I don't care what the third board commissioner said on social media.
I do care that some of the votes in question are provisional ballots. I do care that some not being counted are not a in a provisional ballot envelope.
Now we'll come back to that.
But a judicial finding? No, it doesn't matter. It took place before the ballot counting and it doesn't appear to be in line -- that judgement, check state law in Pennsylvania -- with the duties as outlined for the board.
Reality: In every state, boards have to determine what to do with a ballot that didn't follow the rules completely. Was the voter not aware, not informed, what's the problem?
To count the votes, for example, in Texas, a vote for George H.W Bush -- written in on a ballot -- would count as a vote for Trump because Bush was a Republican and Trump was the Republican nominee. And I thought we all learned, as a nation, about intent in voting during the Florida recounts -- which, true got stopped before they were completed in 2000.
The board's job is to determine intent of votes. That is their job to protect citizen's voting rights.
Let's deal with unmarked ballots -- mailed in. I believe the county, in 2000, understood Florida was counting all ballots that were mailed in -- even those without a postmark that arrived after election day. The defense offered for that was it could have been a mistake by someone serving overseas.
Then we had the hanging chads issue, does anyone remember that.
What Florida was doing -- Republicans and Democrats on boards across the state -- was attempting to determine intent.
Now let's deal with provisional ballots which seem to be the big hang up in the recount.
Oh, the ballot needed the person to sign twice!!!!
Sounds like a poll worker issue.
I don't know about you, but I wouldn't stand in any line to vote, be told I wasn't on the roll but I could have a provision ballot that, if it was later determined I was registered, would count and then fill that ballot out and intentionally not sign a second time.
Was the voter upset -- being told I wasn't registered to vote would upset me.
Especially when I was registered. I get that FOX "NEWS" lies all the time, but Jake Tapper does have a mind so why can't he use it.
Anyone that filled out a provisional ballot was told they weren't showing up on the voter roll. And anyone who filled out a provisional ballot and then turned out not to be on the voter rolls? No one's trying to count that vote. They're not registered voter, their provisional ballot does not count.
The people whose provisional ballots we're speaking of? They were registered voters.
So one of the two things happened -- or a merger of both. The poll worker did not explain how to fill out the provisional ballot in full or the voter was so upset that they didn't hear everything.
And don't you dare say the voter should have read the directions.
If I'm upset like that? My vision goes. So don't you push this off on the voter.
The voter was registered but did not show up on the rolls. That's not their fault.
And, again, I would've been upset if I were told that. (I voted by mail.)
The job is to determine the voters intent. You're looking at a provision ballot where the voter signed it once and filled out the choices for their vote.
The intent is clear.
B-b-b-but no second signature!
You don't disenfranchise a voter. There was already an attempt to disenfranchise them when they were told that they weren't registered. Turns out, they were registered or the ballots wouldn't be an issue now, they'd just be trashed.
Jake Tapper and CNN's legal 'expert' are idiots on this issue. Every state exams 'spoiled' ballots to determine if they can be saved and a voter's vote counted. A voter signing only once on a ballot they were handed by a poll worker that apparently requires two signatures -- why in the world? -- is not reason to toss the votes aside.
It is a valid vote.
What forms do we sign twice, to begin with? HIPAA? We sign that once. That's our medical confidentiality document and we only sign it once.
You're telling a voter that they are not registered and doing so at a time when both Democrats and Republicans are in fear of a stolen election.
You're that voter for Trump who is thinking, "They told me they were going to steal it!" Or you're a Democrat thinking it's a Trump dirty trick.
It's neither. It's a county clerk not doing -- or else failing at -- their job.
And the voter is now worried that their vote won't be counted so even if this new-to-them provisional ballot is being explained properly (a big if), there's every reason in the world for this voter to be distracted and miss the instruction to put their signature on the same ballot twice.
I honestly don't care who wins this seat. Sorry. I honestly also think that counting these ballots would help the Republican candidate. I think a Trump voter -- especially an older voter -- would be even more outraged that they weren't on the roll due to the belief of some (the mistaken belief) that the 2020 election was stolen.
But it doesn't matter who they voted for.
What matters is that they took the time to go down in person, stand in line and vote.
Their vote has to be counted.
It is not their fault that their county clerk is such an idiot that their names were left off the registration lists. And you can't prove -- because no one recorded it -- that the instructions on how to vote on a provisional ballot were provided in a 100% accurate way or that the poll worker explaining it*, explained it in a way that was understood.
*? I am sure a case or two -- maybe all of them -- resulted from a poll worker saying, "The instructions are right there." No, that's not how it works -- especially for anyone with vision issues.
As for the provisional ballots without provisional envelopes? That's 100% a poll worker issue. If the ballot didn't have an envelope when the ballot was completed in person, the poll worker should have noted that and provided the voter with a new envelope before the voter left. (Most likely, a poll worker didn't understand the ballots were supposed to go into an envelope.) As with the other issues above, this is no reason not to count the vote of an American citizen.
And you do not deny a valid ballot and "Only one signature!" does not make it an invalid ballot or lacking a paper envelope to be in does not make it an invalid ballot. You want to have special rules for provisional ballots? You educate the public on them first and you do that via PSAs for months ahead of an election.
I don't think a court would actually side against counting the provisional ballots in the above situations. The verdict being noted was too broad and it's also in conflict with state law. Maybe next time, Jake, get a legal expert on voting from the actual state the issue arose in. Every state is different.
This is beyond stupid and, Jake Tapper, you are embarrassing yourself by aping FOX "NEWS." The point of elections is to get citizens to vote, not to find excuses so that their votes don't count.
We need smarter people in the media. Jake can take comfort in the fact that he's not bats**t crazy (and racist) like Katrina vanden Heuverl who has people trying to figure out her endorsement of Tulsi Gabbard. What a crazy racist Katrina is. She really needs to sell her part of THE NATION and move to another outlet where her Russia cheerleading can be appreciated -- you know, move to Moscow. Never forget that racist worked overtime to have THE NATION discredit Kamala on a daily basis because racist Katrina didn't want a Black woman to be president. Racist Katrina preferred that Donald Trump get a second term.
I'm not reading her Tweets. I'm off Twitter but those of you who are note that she's an apologist for Donald's cabinet pieces and shreiking like Glynneth Greenwald's twin. It's because she's gone over the sewer and she's not coming back to The Five and Dime Ever Again Ever Again. She's nuts. And she's ugly which is why she's alone. Usually a plain faced woman with her money would have landed a man by now. Not ugly Katrina. That noes. It really needed to be broken and set decades ago. It is awful. In a profile, she looks like Toucan Sam.
Speaking of looks, Ava is very suspicious of THE BITCHUATION ROOM. That's all it takes for me. That show is now blocked. We're done with it and will not ever again post a video from it.
You whore and you lie, we don't have time for you. Anglo White Francie wants to bring on a 'Latina' who blames the Democrats for Latinos voting for Trump. Latinos, 'Latina' tells us, know the Democrats have done nothing for immigration -- she means pro-immigration. She's a liar and Francie pants can rot and hell for platforming that inane conversation. As one Black outlet after another has amply demonstrated -- and so has MEDIAS TOUCH -- no, just no. That's not why Latino men went from Trump. You're a damn liar and I wish Francie pants had displayed the 'Latina''s name -- Ava didn't recognize her. They think they and their immediate circle are safe.
It's the same belief that fuels the Lotto. You think you're going to win -- against all the odds. You think you're going to win. And male Latinos voted for Trump not because Dems weren't pro-immigration but because they don't think his plans will effect them.
And there's another reason and that's why we're done now with Francie Pants.
The economy did a play a part in this. But the part it largely played was as an excuse for racism. This was an election where American wanted to back White supremacy.
And I'm getting damn tired of White outlets like Francie Pants' outlet that refuse to acknowledge that.
The 'vacation' many of us are taking from the Democratic Party after being their free labor for years and years and decades?
People on the left -- White people especially -- are acting like that's a non-story. They refuse to acknowledge the pain that they created. They refuse to acknowledge what we saw in real time: That no Black woman was ever going to be good enough for a great many on the left.
They can't reflect, they can't analyze. Every attempt that they make has them running from the reality of racism on their own part.
We, our country, was involved in the Iraq War -- our country started it. In 2004, it was Bully Boy Bush against John Kerry and THE NATION, IN THESE TIMES, DEMOCRACY NOW!, THE PROGRESSIVE, et al did everything they could to elect John Kerry.
This would be the same John Kerry who had a sketchy Iraq plan and who infamously insisted that he voted for the (illegal) war before he voted against it.
But they rallied behind him. These same outlets, this fall, attacked Kamala on a daily basis.
We saw it. We saw how the American left embraced White supremacy to defeat Kamala.
There is no logic defense for what they did. There is no world in which we exist where it was okay to attack the Democratic Party candidate when Donald Trump was the opponent.
But a Black woman was too threatening to elements of the left -- even more than a madmen who will deport everyone he can, who will turn Gaza into a parking lot, who will s**t on the Constitution and destroy democracy.
So Francie Pants, no. Just no.
The following sites updated:
-
-
Matt Gaetz reported pedophile1 hour ago
-
-
Junior is the disgrace of the country3 hours ago
-
Rashida Tlaib, shut the f**k up.3 hours ago
-
Joni4 hours ago
-
-
-
-
-
