Getroot.us.development site
Home  ::   FAQs  ::   Misc.  ::   KJBible
.

Why a write-in vote is ALWAYS a vote for your Opponent.

Why a write-in vote is ALWAYS a vote for your Opponent.

 

The Graphic on this page is correct except that it does not show the several candidates that were prohibited from appearing on the Ballot in several States; they could only recieve votes as 'write-in' candidates.

The official Vote Count  shows that over Ten Million Votes were cast against Donald Trump. And that all of the many millions of 'write-in' votes did absolutely nothing to help any of the dozen candidates that they were cast for.

The  votes that as the graphic shows, had no impact whatsoever on the eventual outcome, might have  been used more wisely; they could have prevented Donald Trump from being elected. See the full sized graphic at the bottom of this page. Feel free to spread it around.

 

 

2016 presidential election

The 2016 presidential election was the first in 50 years without all the protections of the original Voting Right Act. Fourteen states had new voting restrictions in place, including swing states such as Virginia and Wisconsin.

Kansas

In early 2016, a state judge struck down a law requiring voters to show proof of citizenship in cases where the voter had used a national voter registration form. In May, a federal judge ordered the state of Kansas to begin registering approximately 18,000 voters whose registrations had been delayed because they had not shown proof of citizenship. Kansas secretary of state  ordered that the voters be registered, but not for state and local elections. In July, a county judge struck down Kobach's order. Kobach has been repeatedly sued by the  (ACLU) for allegedly trying to restrict voting rights in Kansas.

North Carolina

In 2013, the state House passed a bill that requires voters to show a photo ID issued by, a passport, or a military identification card to begin in 2016. Out-of-state drivers licenses were to be accepted only if the voter registered within 90 days of the election, and university photo identification was not acceptable. In July 2016, a three-judge panel of the  reversed a trial court decision in a number of consolidated actions and struck down the law's photo ID requirement, finding that the new voting provisions targeted African Americans "with almost surgical precision," and that the legislators had acted with clear "discriminatory intent" in enacting strict election rules, shaping the rules based on data they received about African-American registration and voting patterns. On May 15, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the Appeals Court ruling.

North Dakota

An ID law in North Dakota which would have disenfranchised large numbers of Native Americans was overturned in July 2016. The judge wrote, "The undisputed evidence before the Court reveals that voter fraud in North Dakota has been virtually non-existent."

Ohio

Since 1994, Ohio has had a policy of purging infrequent voters from the rolls. In April 2016, a lawsuit was filed, challenging this policy on the grounds that it violated the  (NVRA) and the . In June, the federal district court ruled for the plaintiffs, and entered a preliminary injunction applicable only to the November 2016 election. The preliminary injunction was upheld in September by the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Had it not been upheld, thousands of voters would have been purged from the rolls just a few weeks before the election.<

Wisconsin

In Wisconsin, a federal judge found that the state's restrictive voter ID law led to "real incidents of disenfranchisement, which undermine rather than enhance confidence in elections, particularly in minority communities"; and, given that there was no evidence of widespread voter impersonation in Wisconsin, found that the law was "a cure worse than the disease." In addition to imposing strict voter ID requirements, the law cut back on early voting, required people to live in a ward for at least 28 days before voting, and prohibited emailing absentee ballots to voters. A study by Priorities USA, a  advocacy group, estimates that strict ID laws in Wisconsin led to a significant decrease in voter turnout in 2016, with a disproportionate effect on African-American and Democratic-leaning voters.


2016 Election Count

Red Dawn Email, CDC, USDA, FEMA, FCC, FDA, AFDC, UUCB, PR, SI, 2020, HOUSE, SENATE, ELECTION, US


[ 2020-05-26 03:01:58.419051+00 ] 0cc175b9c0f1b6a831c399e269772661