The Dem's won this one. So what's the official count for the senate mid terms?I hope the GOP still has the majority !

Edited November 10, 20187 yr by riclag

39 minutes ago, riclag said:

Gov. Scott screwed up! Apparently the Elected state election  officer in Broward county Florida had a history of screw ups and violations dating back to 2003.

So why wasn't she fired ? The governor is the only one that has authorization to fire a elected official!

He had the opportunity to do this and should of known prior to announcing that he was running for Senate!  Sad, it is Nelson still

As an elected official, Snipes would have to be removed through an impeachment process. This isn't like the Apprentice show where Trump says "You're fired."

 

Snipes has been the Broward County Election Supervisor since 2003 when first appointed to her position by former Republican Gov. Jeb Bush and been re-elected four times. Obviously, her alleged history of "screw ups and violations" never reached the level sufficient to ever start an impeachment, ie., even during Scott's tenure as Governor!

 

Despite Scott's call for an investigation into Snipes' election supervision, there is no investigation. Florida Department of Law Enforcement spokeswoman Gretl Plessinger said Scott did not submit his request in writing, and that no allegation of voter fraud in Broward has been sent to the Department of State, which oversees elections.

 https://miami.cbslocal.com/2018/11/09/bill-nelson-fires-back-rick-scott-count-continues-florida-senate-race/

 

So far as Governor Scott being in a position to start impeachment, he too might be challenged for a conflict of interest as it is his own election campaign for US Senator that stands to gain by a successful impeachment. I'd expect (though I don't recall any similar incidence) that Governor Scott would have to recuse himself from initiating impeachment, likely coming instead from the elected Republican State Attorney General Pam Bondi. But Republican Ashley Moody will be Florida's next attorney general but not until 2019.

 

In short, maybe Scott didn't "screw up."

15 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

"..trucks were secretly loading stuff" in broad daylight.

"In October 2018, Gaetz falsely claimed that George Soros paid for a caravan of migrants from Central America.^[61]"

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Gaetz}

did you edit that wiki just for meeeee. how sweet. thx❤

23 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

As an elected official, Snipes would have to be removed through an impeachment process. This isn't like the Apprentice show where Trump says "You're fired."

 

Snipes has been the Broward County Election Supervisor since 2003 when first appointed to her position by former Republican Gov. Jeb Bush and been re-elected four times. Obviously, her alleged history of "screw ups and violations" never reached the level sufficient to ever start an impeachment, ie., even during Scott's tenure as Governor!

 

Despite Scott's call for an investigation into Snipes' election supervision, there is no investigation. Florida Department of Law Enforcement spokeswoman Gretl Plessinger said Scott did not submit his request in writing, and that no allegation of voter fraud in Broward has been sent to the Department of State, which oversees elections.

 https://miami.cbslocal.com/2018/11/09/bill-nelson-fires-back-rick-scott-count-continues-florida-senate-race/

 

So far as Governor Scott being in a position to start impeachment, he too might be challenged for a conflict of interest as it is his own election campaign for US Senator that stands to gain by a successful impeachment. I'd expect (though I don't recall any similar incidence) that Governor Scott would have to recuse himself from initiating impeachment, likely coming instead from the elected Republican State Attorney General Pam Bondi. But Republican Ashley Moody will be Florida's next attorney general but not until 2019.

 

In short, maybe Scott didn't "screw up."

I believe he did  screw up. Maybe I'm reading it wrong but the Governor has the power to dismiss  especially knowing she meets the incompetence  clause after all she has a long history dating back to 2003 of ballot issues  

(1) By executive order stating the grounds for the suspension and filed with the Secretary of State, the Governor may suspend from office any elected or appointed municipal official for malfeasance, misfeasance, neglect of duty, habitual drunkenness, incompetence, or permanent inability to perform official duties.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0100-0199/0112/Sections/0112.51.html

I just can't except the GOP's excuses .Knowing there was problems in the past, surely together  dem's and GOP could of had a believable  way to count votes in Broward County. Apparently   65 other counties didn't have issues

8 hours ago, mcambl61 said:

having a requirement for your govt ID and voter registration ID match is not suppression

"In the case on absentee ballots, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit rejected Kemp’s request to stay a lower court’s ruling blocking election officials from throwing out absentee ballots for a supposed signature mismatch, without giving voters an opportunity to contest that and confirm their identity."   https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-georgia/u-s-courts-rule-against-georgia-on-voter-suppression-cases-idUSKCN1N72HE

 

A disproportionate number of these rejected ballots were from minorities, the election officials have no training on signature matching and no limits on which ballots they rejected, and people who's ballots were rejected had no way to prove they were legitimate voters. 

 

That seems like voter suppression to me.

Arizona, Florida and Georgia all have Republican governments and have had for a long time.  If there are problems with election systems, election conduct and the vote count, these are problems of their making.

To solve these problems Republicans in each state are trying to stop vote counting.

 

 

1 hour ago, riclag said:

I believe he did  screw up. Maybe I'm reading it wrong but the Governor has the power to dismiss  especially knowing she meets the incompetence  clause after all she has a long history dating back to 2003 of ballot issues  

(1) By executive order stating the grounds for the suspension and filed with the Secretary of State, the Governor may suspend from office any elected or appointed municipal official for malfeasance, misfeasance, neglect of duty, habitual drunkenness, incompetence, or permanent inability to perform official duties.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0100-0199/0112/Sections/0112.51.html

First - "Suspension" is not "firing."

Burden of proof rests with the State in a suspension (no less than in an impeachment). Otherwise failing the burden of proof (which as yet not been revealed), the suspended official returns to their elected position.

Second (and again) - There is a clear conflict of interest for Governor Scott to immediately suspend Snipes concerning Scott's own election bid for Florida US Senator prior to the conclusion of the ballot count:

• Scott’s action raised questions, including why he’s suddenly stepped up his concern after nearly eight years as governor — when his political future is at stake.
• If Scott took that action, he’d likely be seen as directly acting to remove someone he views as an obstacle to his personal goals. US Sen. R-Fla. Marco Rubio said a suspension isn’t wise — for now.
• One of Scott’s attorneys, Tim Cerio, said there was no consideration of suspending Snipes “at this time.”
• Republican lawyer-lobbyist Justin Sayfie said "there’s a check on a governor who might be tempted to use his power to advance his political interests." “Obviously everything he does will be scrutinized at an extremely high level, so that kind of puts a check to some extent on his actions,”

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-rick-scott-candidate-governor-voting-20181109-story.html

If Scott loses his bid for US Senator he might still be in a political bind as Governor in a subsequent suspension of Snipes might be seen as a form of political retaliation against an elected official. Especially since his term as governor ends in 2018. Scott is getting transparency and accountability in the count via the court and would do best to lower his accusatory rhetoric and let the citizens of Florida make their determination.

 

10 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

First - "Suspension" is not "firing."

Burden of proof rests with the State in a suspension (no less than in an impeachment). Otherwise failing the burden of proof (which as yet not been revealed), the suspended official returns to their elected position.

Second (and again) - There is a clear conflict of interest for Governor Scott to immediately suspend Snipes concerning Scott's own election bid for Florida US Senator prior to the conclusion of the ballot count:

• Scott’s action raised questions, including why he’s suddenly stepped up his concern after nearly eight years as governor — when his political future is at stake.
• If Scott took that action, he’d likely be seen as directly acting to remove someone he views as an obstacle to his personal goals. US Sen. R-Fla. Marco Rubio said a suspension isn’t wise — for now.
• One of Scott’s attorneys, Tim Cerio, said there was no consideration of suspending Snipes “at this time.”
• Republican lawyer-lobbyist Justin Sayfie said "there’s a check on a governor who might be tempted to use his power to advance his political interests." “Obviously everything he does will be scrutinized at an extremely high level, so that kind of puts a check to some extent on his actions,”

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-rick-scott-candidate-governor-voting-20181109-story.html

If Scott loses his bid for US Senator he might still be in a political bind as Governor in a subsequent suspension of Snipes might be seen as a form of political retaliation against an elected official. Especially since his term as governor ends in 2018. Scott is getting transparency and accountability in the count via the court and would do best to lower his accusatory rhetoric and let the citizens of Florida make their determination.

 

Your quoting news sources ,Im quoting the law. Read the law,I could care less what a news source says . Back up your source with a law or statue.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0100-0199/0112/Sections/0112.51.html

Edited November 10, 20187 yr by riclag

Municipal officers; suspension; removal from office.—

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0100-0199/0112/Sections/0112.51.html

25 minutes ago, riclag said:

Your quoting news sources ,Im quoting the law. Read the law,I could care less what a news source says . Back up your source with a law or statue.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0100-0199/0112/Sections/0112.51.html

Read article 1) of your link: " By executive order stating the grounds for the suspension and filed with the Secretary of State, the Governor may suspend from office any elected or appointed municipal official for malfeasance, misfeasance, neglect of duty, habitual drunkenness, incompetence, or permanent inability to perform official duties. "

That is the same text you quoted yourself earlier.

First time removal is mentioned is in article 5 " (5) If the municipal official is convicted of any of the charges contained in the indictment or information by reason of which he or she was suspended under the provisions of this section, the Governor shall remove such municipal official from office. "

Know the difference between suspension and removal? As you said yourself, you're reading it wrong, incompetence will not be a ground for dismissal, unless the incompetence could lead to a conviction.

Edited November 10, 20187 yr by stevenl

A post in violation of fair use policy has been removed as well as the replies. 

 

Off topic posts and the replies have been removed. 

 

Troll posts and the replies have been removed. 

On 11/10/2018 at 1:14 PM, Srikcir said:

As an elected official

she was appointed in 2003, not elected

On 11/10/2018 at 3:05 PM, heybruce said:

A disproportionate number of these rejected ballots were from minorities,

What evidence is there of that? And you assume they are all voting for the progressive lunatic? 

 

 

17 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

she was appointed in 2003, not elected

"Republican Gov. Jeb Bush asked Snipes to serve as Supervisor of Elections in Broward County – Florida's second-most populous county – nearly 15 years ago."

 

"Snipes was reelected in 2004, 2008, 2012 and 2016."    https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/politics/elections/who-is-brenda-snipes-the-broward-county-supervisor-of-elections/67-612946611

On 11/10/2018 at 3:05 AM, heybruce said:

"In the case on absentee ballots, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit rejected Kemp’s request to stay a lower court’s ruling blocking election officials from throwing out absentee ballots for a supposed signature mismatch, without giving voters an opportunity to contest that and confirm their identity."   https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-georgia/u-s-courts-rule-against-georgia-on-voter-suppression-cases-idUSKCN1N72HE

 

A disproportionate number of these rejected ballots were from minorities, the election officials have no training on signature matching and no limits on which ballots they rejected, and people who's ballots were rejected had no way to prove they were legitimate voters. 

 

That seems like voter suppression to me.

 

19 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

What evidence is there of that? And you assume they are all voting for the progressive lunatic? 

 

 

As you can see by reading my complete post, it has nothing to do with voter ID laws or with what votes were rejected. 

 

Regarding my claim that a disproportionate number of rejected absentee ballots were from minorities; numerous sources reported that the highest rate of rejections occurred in the minority/majority counties in Georgia:

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gwinnett-county-rejected-ballots_us_5bc64bb8e4b055bc947b129f

 

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/10/georgia-county-and-secretary-of-state-sued-for-rejecting-minority-absentee-ballots-at-high-rates/

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/georgia-county-facing-lawsuits-after-rejecting-absentee-ballots/ar-BBODgGF

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/rejection-of-hundreds-of-absentee-ballots-in-suburban-atlanta-county-draws-legal-challenges/2018/10/16/dafce19a-d177-11e8-b2d2-f397227b43f0_story.html?utm_term=.63189d11b037

 

 

A post containing a link to an unapproved source has been removed as well as a reply. 

 

A post containing a Twitter link has been removed as per the following forum rule:

 

18) You will not post phone numbers, email addresses, business names, or web/Facebook/Twitter/Google+ addresses in posts or signatures. Web addresses to personal non-commercial sites sites/blogs, or Facebook/Twitter/Google+ addresses, may be posted in a member's profile page.

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Regarding my claim that a disproportionate number of rejected absentee ballots were from minorities; numerous sources reported that the highest rate of rejections occurred in the minority/majority counties in Georgia:

a 6 percent rejection rate is what we are on about? and no reasons given, like how many were not filled out correctly or had mismatching info?  are you assuming that they were rejected just because they are minorities? is everything about identity politics with progressives?

 

6 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

a 6 percent rejection rate is what we are on about? and no reasons given, like how many were not filled out correctly or had mismatching info?  are you assuming that they were rejected just because they are minorities? is everything about identity politics with progressives?

 

Read the links, reasons for the rejections were given.  Also, the elections in question were decided by margins much less than 6%.  As explained, the counties with the highest rejection rates were minority/majority counties.  That's not speculation, it's an established fact.

 

1 hour ago, mcambl61 said:

What evidence is there of that? And you assume they are all voting for the progressive lunatic? 

 

 

Are you seriously contending that conservatives back a national id card?

Off-topic post and reply removed.   Continue and face a suspension.  

 

12 hours ago, mcambl61 said:

What evidence is there of that? And you assume they are all voting for the progressive lunatic? 

 

 

The purpose of elections is for the citizens to select and legitimize a government, not for the government to select and legitimize the citizens.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott continues alleging voter fraud despite denial from state elections division

Gov. Rick Scott is still waging conspiracy theories in the messy Florida election, days after multiple government agencies said there was no evidence of voter fraud.

"Sen. Nelson is clearly trying to commit fraud to try to win this election," Scott told host Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday” of his opponent in the Senate race, Democrat Bill Nelson, calling him a “sore loser” several times.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-news-florida-rick-scott-election-fraud-20181111-story.html